MLB (Non Phillies) News and Discussion 2025 Season

[zambonir]

The media I have read (just the Athletic granted, but multiple writers) says the Sox must make the playoffs this year and the return is not that impressive on a pure talent level (just on a money level). If they turn around and sell off Chapman and see Bregman walk away (which could happen anyway) it's not exactly Betts 2.0, and in three years it will probably look great to not have Devers' contract, but it still feels more like a combination salary dump/chemistry reset than a good trade.

And yeah, seeing it happens off a sweep of the Yankees is insult to injury.

[VoteForKalas]

Definitely a short term vs long term analysis must have been part of the decision.

Short term, it makes them worse since they have no one with the talent of Devers to replace him and it hurts their chances of making the playoffs this season.

However, I doubt they would have made the playoffs this season with Devers. Their pitching is not great. The division is likely out of reach and, while they are in the WC race, I do not see them as consistent enough to beat out their competitors there.

Long term is where the value of this trade works better IMO. I do not believe Devers would have aged well, but now that is SF's problem. The roster and payroll flexibility this gives the Bosox who do have some young prospects they want to play is pretty good, but only if the team is committed to winning and investing that money back into the team. That is a large ? for fans and media here who speculate that ownership is largely distracted (Henry owns several other sports franchises) and the management unproven outside of Alex Cora who has his own baggage to carry around.

[andyb]

Short term it clearly does not help, but as has been noted, getting out of the money is really valuable to them. And they almost had too many good young hitters in Anthony, Campbell, and Meyer while needing places to play them. They add pitching depth here (much more Harrison than Hicks) and they can add a $30 million a year player offensively if they want to next year.

[BostonRoss]

Some have compared the Devers deal to the Sox trading Nomar and Manny. Those weren't so much salary dumps (though I think they saved money in both deals), but they were definitely chemistry resets. But those guys were older than Devers.

It seems more to me like the Sox dumping Adrian Gonzalez, Carl Crawford, and Josh Beckett on the Dodgers. A huge salary dump, and the return was basically valueless. Only Gonzalez did much for the Dodgers.

I'm also reminded of the Phillies trading Scott Rolen. Scott was more vocal in shooting his way out of town, but it wasn't long before the Phillies shelled out big bucks for the genial Jim Thome.

[andyb]

The difference is this was done AFTER signing the contract. Trades of players before they sign are much more common. I think they just regretted the deal from the start. They should have re-signed Mookie when they could. After they failed in that (and the return was mediocre) they signed Devers almost to save face. 10 year contracts just should not be given to players that become DHs almost immediately.

[Philsmania]

The other BIG part of the deal for the Sox:

The Red Sox will not send any money to cover the remaining $250 million-plus on Devers’ contract.

Giants have been the bridesmaid but not the bride for a number of prominent FA's the last couple of offseasons so they may have been anxious to take on a big money star.

[Philsmania]

I'm also reminded of the Phillies trading Scott Rolen. Scott was more vocal in shooting his way out of town, but it wasn't long before the Phillies shelled out big bucks for the genial Jim Thome.

One big difference was that Rolen was about three months away from free agency himself. I often believe that in hindsight, Montgomery, Wade and Bowa should have had a heart-to-heart sitdown with Rolen and his agent after the 2000 season and if he made it clear then that he did not want to stay in Philadelphia, they should have traded him at that point when he would have had two full seasons of team control and probably would have brought back a much more valuable return. Even so, we still did pretty well in getting Polanco and just might have won that trade if we never signed Bell and simply kept Polanco as our third baseman from 2002-12 (Polanco wouldn't have been a HOFer like Rolen but he would have been a Phillie considerably longer and contributed more to them than Rolen did to the Cards).

[bkox]

A huge salary dump, and the return was basically valueless

They did get Tibbs, 13th overall in last year's draft and putting up an 857 OPS in High A this year

[BostonRoss]

True, although it was the previous team president that signed Devers (and traded Mookie). I don't think the Red Sox regretted the deal until this February, when Devers started raising a stink about not playing 3B. It intensified after he refused to play 1B though I think the Sox brass could have done a better job of communicating with him. Most Sox fans around here that I talk with had been happy with Devers but changed their minds this year.

[BostonRoss]

A huge salary dump, and the return was basically valueless

They did get Tibbs, 13th overall in last year's draft and putting up an 857 OPS in High A this year

I was referring to the Sox 2012 trade, where they got a month of James Loney and several prospects that never made it.

[andyb]

The 2012 trade was much more of a salary dump of multiple overpriced and older players (adding Carl Crawford and Josh Beckett). Agree the return was awful and even at the time it was not thought of as good.

Devers a bit younger but also is currently a higher level player. The Red Sox are also currently contending (even if disappointing). This trade only makes sense as a quick reload with the full intent on spending the money saved next year. And they are doing it from a position of strength with the intent on guaranteeing young bats (mainly Anthony and Campbell) playing time now.

Are Harrison and Tibbs (the big pieces coming back) better than what they got in the 2012 trade? Too soon to tell. I just think this is a quick reload moving to a new direction rather than a more pure salary dump even if moving on from the Devers money is the biggest return.

[bkox]

I was referring to the Sox 2012 trade, where they got a month of James Loney and several prospects that never made it.

I know. I thought you were saying the Devers trade was similar to that one.. which is why I pointed out Tibbs

[julio]

I think I know how the Rockies fans must have felt, the night the Phils rescued the Coors Field ground crew from a runaway tarp.

https://bsky.app/profile/kylegriffin1.bsky.social/post/3lrybxzultk2p