A Realistic View at the 2027 Red Sox Part I

[Randy Red Sox]

On 10/7/2026 at 7:21 PM, moonslav59 said:

Soxprospects.com really likes Durbin as the 400+ PA Utility guy, and I'm thinking he and Sogard would make a nice bench.

Sign Soto.

Arias at SS

Mead at 2B (DH)

and where do you put Story?

[Randy Red Sox]

2 hours ago, mvp 78 said:

Gray can opt out, take the 10M from the Sox and get 21 AAV from somebody else to come out ahead. 

or just put the money saved in JH's pocket.

[Randy Red Sox]

1 hour ago, moonslav59 said:

I even preferred Alonso to Bregman.

I'm still glad we didn't bid higher for AB.

i didn't want AB long term either.

[drewski6]

2 hours ago, 5GoldGlovesOF,75 said:

ONE bat? Then I take it that only the other 20% of posters think we need more than one. 

I doubt anyone's counting on a big year from Anthony, at least until we see him in Spring Training -- if there is a ST and if he's even there (Sox may ship him up to Boston to rehab so he's away from all the distractions in Florida).

But why is there already so much speculation here on trading more assets? We had career home run years from Mickey (10), Mona (6), Sogard (5) and Seigler (3)!!!!

I'm not being sarcastic; Brez bragged about it at the presser.

I'm with Maddie -- to paraphrase a 70s expression: this rots.

I hear you.  Ive noticed fans love for rosters to clean and set, and having multiple options with versatility that can withstand the injuries/slumps/fall-offs can get in the way of that.

I do think GMs see it differently and having MLB talent they can call up and use like Gasper, Sogard, Mona, Siegler ...Or having a strong bench that can get hot and carry you for a little while is very valuable.  

I dont think JH and Breslow look at the roster and see like a 7m backup and think, if we can free up this money, we can get a better player here.  I dont think the budgets are set in stone like that.  Also, when you do that and then you get an injury or a drop off, the same people who love to be as efficient as possible are so quick to blame unforeseen injuries/drop-offs

[drewski6]

For the last 8 years, since we got rid of Dombrowski, people have been hesitant to get hitters to contracts that could go south 4 years down the line.,...

Completely overlooking that since we've developed that mindset as an org and fanbase, to go max efficiency, we've finished an average of fourth place over 7-8 years and have only gotten past the first round of the playoffs once.

Maybe some of us have defense , chase value, and focus on homegrown youngsters fatigue.  Arias is a 5'11 D first SS.  I dont think hes coming to save the singles hitting, walk drawing, plate passives that the Red Sox have become.

[mvp 78]

11 minutes ago, drewski6 said:

For the last 8 years, since we got rid of Dombrowski, people have been hesitant to get hitters to contracts that could go south 4 years down the line.,...
 

I think it's more to do with posters arguing that JH won't eat contracts like that and doesn't have an appetite for 300M deals. It's not that we don't want those guys, we've just seen really great players get dumped because our very rich owner decided he couldn't afford them anymore. People are just arguing within those confines of what can probably be done. 

[Randy Red Sox]

2 hours ago, mvp 78 said:

I think it's more to do with posters arguing that JH won't eat contracts like that and doesn't have an appetite for 300M deals. It's not that we don't want those guys, we've just seen really great players get dumped because our very rich owner decided he couldn't afford them anymore. People are just arguing within those confines of what can probably be done. 

since DD was canned the Sox have done the vast majority of their signings to a 1-2 yr deals.  Constant revolving door. Wasted tons of $$$ on gambles on injured and rehabbing P that 90% of the time didn't pan out.

[mvp 78]

2 hours ago, Randy Red Sox said:

and where do you put Story?

Send him to COL. Eat his contract.

[mvp 78]

2 minutes ago, Randy Red Sox said:

since DD was canned the Sox have done the vast majority of their signings to a 1-2 yr deals.  Constant revolving door. Wasted tons of $$$ on gambles on injured and rehabbing P that 90% of the time didn't pan out.

The guys that are signing 1-2 year deals aren't the upper echelon guys that tend to hit big. Sox take little swings in FA and aren't finding much impact there. 

[notin]

3 hours ago, Old Red said:

Huh? Not many of those other teams are going to be saying gee it wasn’t worth it to get into the postseason. Outside of the 32-5 run the Red Sox were a losing team that wasn’t that good. 

You seem to think the Sox were the only team that fits that bill.  
 

Houston was a .500 team.  They were never very good.  The Cubs had a 20-3 stretch early in the year and were under .500 in their other games.  The White Sox and the Guardians both had hot stretches without which they played sub-.500 ball.  Cotillo’s point is kind of silly because he is essentially saying “if you don’t count their wins, their record gets worse.”  No s***.

And it’s actually more egregious for the Sox, because their hot streak lasted nearly a quarter of the season.  That’s not some flukish, lucky  break of weak scheduling; that’s an impressive run that shouldn’t be disregarded so easily…

[Old Red]

24 minutes ago, notin said:

You seem to think the Sox were the only team that fits that bill.  
 

Houston was a .500 team.  They were never very good.  The Cubs had a 20-3 stretch early in the year and were under .500 in their other games.  The White Sox and the Guardians both had hot stretches without which they played sub-.500 ball.  Cotillo’s point is kind of silly because he is essentially saying “if you don’t count their wins, their record gets worse.”  No s***.

And it’s actually more egregious for the Sox, because their hot streak lasted nearly a quarter of the season.  That’s not some flukish, lucky  break of weak scheduling; that’s an impressive run that shouldn’t be disregarded so easily…

So like I asked how many of those teams FANS are saying it wasn’t worth getting into the postseason? The Red 32-5 with 15 straight wins once in a LIFETIME magic carpet ride with a bunch of P&P players wasn’t flukish, or lucky break? How many times had a Red Sox team ever done that before? If the 2018 had done it you wouldn’t say it was flukish, or lucky, but this team was a whole different story even in a very weakened AL.

[drewski6]

2 hours ago, mvp 78 said:

I think it's more to do with posters arguing that JH won't eat contracts like that and doesn't have an appetite for 300M deals. It's not that we don't want those guys, we've just seen really great players get dumped because our very rich owner decided he couldn't afford them anymore. People are just arguing within those confines of what can probably be done. 

Some posters - yes, are trying to work with what they think are resource limitations. But some posters really do applaud the shying away from 300m contracts, and wanting to be max efficient with resources especially on the offensive side.

Im neither.  Im fine with the money they spend, I think its a mentality and allocation problem.  We keep dumping sluggers, and keep dropping in the slug ranks.  And I dont think the primary reason is JH's budget.  

[drewski6]

38 minutes ago, mvp 78 said:

The guys that are signing 1-2 year deals aren't the upper echelon guys that tend to hit big. Sox take little swings in FA and aren't finding much impact there. 

I know he was a trade and not a FA, but end of day, Contreras was a low cost add due to his age and 1-2 yr commitment.  And that was an example of it working out.  But the issue is for all we added with Contreras , we dumped more - because we fell from like 15th in slug to like 26th despite getting great numbers from Contreras.

[drewski6]

21 minutes ago, notin said:

You seem to think the Sox were the only team that fits that bill.  
 

Houston was a .500 team.  They were never very good.  The Cubs had a 20-3 stretch early in the year and were under .500 in their other games.  The White Sox and the Guardians both had hot stretches without which they played sub-.500 ball.  Cotillo’s point is kind of silly because he is essentially saying “if you don’t count their wins, their record gets worse.”  No s***.

And it’s actually more egregious for the Sox, because their hot streak lasted nearly a quarter of the season.  That’s not some flukish, lucky  break of weak scheduling; that’s an impressive run that shouldn’t be disregarded so easily…

What about the other three quarters of the season, and the fact that we couldnt hit in the playoffs 2 years in a row?

Thats an aside, I actually dont understand the we wasted to make a push argument when both guys we got are going to be on the team next year.

[notin]

13 minutes ago, Old Red said:

So like I asked how many of those teams FANS are saying it wasn’t worth getting into the postseason? The Red 32-5 with 15 straight wins once in a LIFETIME magic carpet ride with a bunch of P&P players wasn’t flukish, or lucky break? How many times had a Red Sox team ever done that before?

Probably none, which is why Sox fans shouldn’t.  The Cubs had a worse postseason than Boston and were less than thrilled with the outcome, but their most common complaint was having to get Peacock subscriptions to watch both games, not that the team should have bailed and built for the future.

So a 32-5 run is lucky? Thats just sad and stupid.  Yeah, they luckily swept the Yankees, Rays, Dodgers, White Sox (twice) and numerous other teams.  I suppose you need to call it luck to fit a stupid argument by Cotillo…

[notin]

1 minute ago, drewski6 said:

What about the other three quarters of the season, and the fact that we couldnt hit in the playoffs 2 years in a row?

Thats an aside, I actually dont understand the we wasted to make a push argument when both guys we got are going to be on the team next year.

I just cannot get worked up about 4 games across 2 seasons.  
 

How about that the Sox were the only team to make the postseason playing a schedule that had two 90 game winners in their division?

I think fans might be getting too worked up anout when the wins happened as opposed to that the wins happened.  They all count the same regardless…

 

 

[mvp 78]

14 minutes ago, Old Red said:

So like I asked how many of those teams FANS are saying it wasn’t worth getting into the postseason? The Red 32-5 with 15 straight wins once in a LIFETIME magic carpet ride with a bunch of P&P players wasn’t flukish, or lucky break? How many times had a Red Sox team ever done that before? If the 2018 had done it you wouldn’t say it was flukish, or lucky, but this team was a whole different story even in a very weakened AL.

How many times did we hear that the 2013 Sox were a fluke or a once in a lifetime team? 

[drewski6]

I understand that the swings (not bat swings , but like season ebbs and flows) and streaks of our Red Sox was on the heavy side.  But I mean like 2 years ago we saw a Tigers team like lose 20 in a row, and then win 20 in a row, and then lose 20 in a row.  There was a team, think it was maybe the Royals, that sold off their players and then had a magical run to get into the playoffs.

Playoff long shots getting in , teams needing an epic collapse to miss out - and then doing such, baseball teams being super streaky is nothing new.  

I am not in the boat of fans that they think last years move set us back , and I am not cursing the win streak cuz it caused us to buy rather than sell.  Why?

Because if we didnt have Adley and Mead right now, I would project us for dead last in the ALE next year, and because we have them for next year, Im predicting third place and another one and done.  And Im not saying thats enough, Im just saying Im not regretting the move for Adley nor Mead.

In both cases, they were essentially future pitchers for current bats trades.  Especially Mead.  As I think looking for offense from a catcher is a fool's errand.  But still, having pitching depth just means you are pulling your starter in the fourth inning of a 0-0 playoff game.

BATS FIRST

[mvp 78]

12 minutes ago, drewski6 said:

Some posters - yes, are trying to work with what they think are resource limitations. But some posters really do applaud the shying away from 300m contracts, and wanting to be max efficient with resources especially on the offensive side.

Im neither.  Im fine with the money they spend, I think its a mentality and allocation problem.  We keep dumping sluggers, and keep dropping in the slug ranks.  And I dont think the primary reason is JH's budget.  

The Sox should still have Xander, Mookie and Raffy IMO. 🤷‍♂️

[drewski6]

1 minute ago, mvp 78 said:

The Sox should still have Xander, Mookie and Raffy IMO. 🤷‍♂️

Yep.  Or at the very least Bregman and Alonso.

[notin]

2 minutes ago, mvp 78 said:

How many times did we hear that the 2013 Sox were a fluke or a once in a lifetime team? 

They were called a fluke??

They should give their rings back!!

[mvp 78]

10 minutes ago, drewski6 said:

I know he was a trade and not a FA, but end of day, Contreras was a low cost add due to his age and 1-2 yr commitment.  And that was an example of it working out.  But the issue is for all we added with Contreras , we dumped more - because we fell from like 15th in slug to like 26th despite getting great numbers from Contreras.

They fell to 26th because Duran stopped hitting, Durbin plays 3b, Story got hurt, the Cs were terrible... Part of it is losing Bregman, but not all of it. Contreras out SLG'd '25 Breggie.

[mvp 78]

3 minutes ago, notin said:

They were called a fluke??

They should give their rings back!!

Just give me one!

[notin]

3 minutes ago, drewski6 said:

I understand that the swings (not bat swings , but like season ebbs and flows) and streaks of our Red Sox was on the heavy side.  But I mean like 2 years ago we saw a Tigers team like lose 20 in a row, and then win 20 in a row, and then lose 20 in a row.  There was a team, think it was maybe the Royals, that sold off their players and then had a magical run to get into the playoffs.

Playoff long shots getting in , teams needing an epic collapse to miss out - and then doing such, baseball teams being super streaky is nothing new.  

I am not in the boat of fans that they think last years move set us back , and I am not cursing the win streak cuz it caused us to buy rather than sell.  Why?

Because if we didnt have Adley and Mead right now, I would project us for dead last in the ALE next year, and because we have them for next year, Im predicting third place and another one and done.  And Im not saying thats enough, Im just saying Im not regretting the move for Adley nor Mead.

In both cases, they were essentially future pitchers for current bats trades.  Especially Mead.  As I think looking for offense from a catcher is a fool's errand.  But still, having pitching depth just means you are pulling your starter in the fourth inning of a 0-0 playoff game.

BATS FIRST

The Tigers (2024, I think), sold some players off and made the pistseason.

No team has ever had multiple 20 game winners in streaks in a season, or a 20 game winners streak plus a 20 game losing streak.  20 game streaks in either direction are crazy rate.  
 

The 2026 Cubs did have two ten game winning steaks and a 10 game losing streak.  I think they’re the only team ever to do that in one season….

[moonslav59]

3 hours ago, Randy Red Sox said:

and where do you put Story?

Dump and try to save $6-8M or back-up SS/2B/DH and maybe 3B.

[drewski6]

Just now, mvp 78 said:

They fell to 26th because Duran stopped hitting, Durbin plays 3b, Story got hurt, the Cs were terrible... Part of it is losing Bregman, but not all of it. Contreras out SLG'd '25 Breggie.

How come I get boo'd out of the room whenever I bring up Durbin not being good enough to start on a team that wants to win the WS.  Both here and among my circle of real life RS fan pals.  Doesnt mean hes bad.  It just means I see defense first players without slug as backups.  If we go into next season with Durbin as a bench player, I assure you he will be starting by the end of it.  

Again, I think max efficiency chasing, especially on the offensive side IS the problem.  I think looking at the team through the lens of positions IS the problem.  I told you all 3 years ago, you will see more musical chairs on defense.  You dont say we lost to Michael Jordan because our guards and forwards were B/B+ but our Center was a D- , so if we can get a C+ player to play Center, we can beat Jordan!

Again its a mentality issue.  Its about needing elite hitters, and multiple of them, and it matters not what position they play.  Cuz if you can add Michael Jordan, you do it, regardless if you have a good SG already.  These guys can move around on D, no prob.  There is no such thing as a second baseman, or a left fielder, or a blah blah blah.  Ideal defensive alignment , or chasing that, is how you drop to 26th in slug and think the problem is that you need to swap your 2b and 3b defensively.  Deck chairs on the Titanic.

[mvp 78]

15 minutes ago, notin said:

Probably none, which is why Sox fans shouldn’t.  The Cubs had a worse postseason than Boston and were less than thrilled with the outcome, but their most common complaint was having to get Peacock subscriptions to watch both games, not that the team should have bailed and built for the future…

12-1 is worse than 18-2? 

[notin]

1 minute ago, mvp 78 said:

12-1 is worse than 18-2? 

12-1 against King and Pivetta vs 18-2 vs Schlittler and Fried?  I think so…

[drewski6]

1 minute ago, notin said:

12-1 against King and Pivetta vs 18-2 vs Schlittler and Fried?  I think so…

Fried wasnt sharp.  It was like all the announcers spoke about.  How many meatballs did we let go right by?  He was hanging curveballs and throwing fastballs middle-middle all game.  Our offense was unacceptable 2 playoff exits in a row.  And I dont think its your intent, but pointing to the opposing pitching, kind of gives the impression that the offensive situation isnt dire.

To win the WS, you have to hit good pitching at some point.

[mvp 78]

3 minutes ago, drewski6 said:

How come I get boo'd out of the room whenever I bring up Durbin not being good enough to start on a team that wants to win the WS.  

Durbin could be a starting 3b, but he better be hitting 8th or 9th! The problem is that this lineup also had holes at SS, 2B, C (Wong), LF (Duran) and DH for most of the year. Hard to sneak 5 bats into the 7 - 9 spots.