The fact that the Red Sox failed to reach contract extensions with either Rafael Devers or Xander Bogaerts before Opening Day does not, in and of itself, mean that the two players are headed out the door.
Devers isn't eligible for free agency for another 18 months -- following the 2023 season -- and Bogaerts remains under control through the end of the current season. A lot can happen between now and then.
As chairman Tom Werner noted in an interview on NESN Friday, the Sox have, in the not-too-distant past, reached in-season deals with, among others, Dustin Pedroia, and more recently, though on a smaller scale, Matt Barnes a year ago.
As was the case right up until they shipped Mookie Betts to the Dodgers, Red Sox upper management and ownership continues to maintain publicly that it "wants" or "wishes'' to keep both players.
"We want both Xander and Raffy to be with us,'' assured Werner.
"We want these guys a part of the Red Sox organization forever,'' echoed team president and CEO Sam Kennedy.
Chief baseball officer Chaim Bloom has spoken in similar terms, stressing that it's the organization's goal to extend both.
At some point, however, the talk begins to ring a bit hollow. It's one thing to say that you want to sign a player, and it's another altogether to get it done.
There's also the subtle inference that comes with repeatedly saying the team wants to keep a player: perhaps there's a hope that the team gets to claim the high ground. Well, the Sox wanted to keep them, but couldn't. Maybe the players are being greedy.
It would be hard for the Red Sox to cry poor-mouth. The team has increased more than fives times in value since it was purchased in 2022, and between new streaming deals and sports gambling opportunities, new revenue streams are multi-fold.
Certainly, the failure to reach agreement is at least some cause for concern. This past spring training seemed to be the perfect time to get new deals done with two foundational players and rid the club of any uncertainty going forward. And the more relaxed setting of spring training, without the day-to-day distractions and grind of the regular season as a backdrop, would have seemed to create a better atmosphere for talks.
Now that that window has closed, however, the opportunities will become fewer. (Both Bogaerts and Devers have said they don't wish to resume negotiations, but there are windows in which it could still be done, including the All-Star break).
A certain amount of posturing is to be expected in the early stages of talks. In general, teams tend to start low, while players and their agents come in high. Eventually, there's some softening of positions and a willingness to compromise.
But some details on the numbers being discussed don't inspire much optimism. According to the New York Post, the Red Sox offered Bogaerts four years and $90 million, with salaries of $20 million in each of the next three seasons with a $30 million in 2025. Essentially, the Red Sox offered Bogaerts one additional year and a $10 million raise. (His current deal, out of which he'll presumably opt, already guarantees him $20 million in 2022, 2023 and 2024).
So at a time when the top shortstops on the market (Corey Seager, Francisco Lindor, Carlos Correa) are getting $30 million annually in long-term deals, the Sox would only go to that level for one season. One wonders if Scott Boras, who represents Bogaerts, was tempted to channel his inner John McEnroe and shout: "You cannot be serious!''
It's fair to note that Bogaerts, while a superb offensive performer, is not in the same class as Lindor and Correa, and maybe even Seager, when it comes to defense. His defensive metrics portray Bogaerts as sure-handed, but quite limited when it comes to range. Still, Bogaerts can stake his claim as one of the most productive hitters at his position. Since 2018, he owns the highest OPS of all shortstops.
To think that he would be satisfied with one additional year at $30 million is beyond comprehension. Why would Bogaerts accept a "new'' contract that does not pay him a single dollar more than his current one for the next three seasons?
"Why do that?'' asked an executive with another MLB team. "To show that you made an offer? Why insult him? Don't offer anything at all.''
If the Red Sox had proposed, say, $25 million over the next three seasons with a fourth year at $30 million, that too would have likely been insufficient. But it might have been a step in the right direction.
It's hard not to read Bogaerts' body language and listen to his public comments and come away thinking he feels disrespected by the team's effort. If it's the team's plan to shift Trevor Story back to shortstop next year then wait for the arrival of Marcelo Mayer in 2024 or 2025, their actions might be better understood. Still, there would seem to be a better way to deal with Bogaerts then to offer a contract he had zero chance of even considering, much less accepting.
Bogaerts has already signed one deal -- the current one -- at below market value. The chances of him doing it a second time, with the opt-out clause at his disposal, are negligible, if not entirely non-existent.
Things are no more rosy with Devers, with some reports pegging the gap between the two sides at $100 million. That would seem to suggest either a huge chasm over the AAV of such a deal, or a far shorter term on the part of the Red Sox. Maybe they're willing to pay Devers at or near the $30 million threshold, but for a shorter time period, so as to limit their liability. But if the Sox believe that Devers would be willing to exchange length for a higher AAV, then they need to make it worth his while.
The impasses might be easier for Red Sox fans to accept if they had made a competitive offer to Devers. Without saying so, the Red Sox would be saying: "We can't hand out two long-term deals worth $30 million annually, so we're prioritizing the younger player (Devers), whom we feel has more upside.''
That might be tough for Bogaerts' loyalists to swallow, but getting a contract extension done with Devers would suggest a willingness to go all-in with the younger player. And with Story and Mayer as options at short, the Red Sox could sell it as a changing of the guard at one position.
Instead, a sizable segment of the fan base is experiencing a bad case of Deja Vu. Suddenly, this feels like Mookie Betts all over again. As with Betts, the Red Sox made a number of offers in the time leading up to his final year, unable to reach agreement. Faced with the prospect of losing Betts for a draft pick, the team auctioned him off and took about 60 cents on the dollar in return.
I don't foresee the Sox trading either Bogaerts or Devers. For one thing, Bogaerts has a no-trade clause and would have to agree to be moved. Moreover, the Red Sox believe they're pennant contenders for 2022 and aren't about to trade off a key player in the middle of the season. And even if Bogaerts were to agree to a trade, his value would be depressed, since any acquiring team would realize that it was effectively obtaining a player who will be a free agent in November.
Trading Devers this season would also make little sense. If the team fails, again, to reach agreement on an extension early this off-season, it could pivot into shopping him next winter.
When the Red Sox signed Story to a six-year, $140 million deal last month, it put to rest any suggestion that it wouldn't compete on the free-agent market for the game's best players. That was an important narrative to strike down.
But now comes a bigger one:
But, trade or no trade, the franchise will face real consequences if it can't extend either Bogaerts and Devers. That will make for three straight home-grown All-Stars the club couldn't or wouldn't retain. Beyond the message that sends to the fan base, what about its future stars?
In their quest for sustainability and payroll flexibility, are the Sox now doomed to have control of their top stars for just six seasons?
That message might be sold in Kansas City or Milwaukee, but not in Boston. Again, the Sox aren't obligated to retain every single player headed for free agency. But for the elite players who can command a big payday when their time comes, it's unacceptable for a franchise with the resources the Red Sox possess to figuratively turn their pockets inside out and shrug.
__________________________
On the subject of contract extensions, the Fenway home opener had to be an anxious time for Twins management.
Last November, days before the lockout, the Twins signed outfielder Byron Buxton to a seven-year, $100 million extension. That deal raised eyebrows across the game, not only for the commitment made by the small-market Twins, but because Buxton had been so injury-prone.
Since becoming a full-time player in 2016, Buxton had played in more than 100 games for the Twins exactly once in the last five full seasons, the 2020 pandemic-shortened season excluded. His games-played totals in the other four years: 92, 28, 87 and 61.
Those numbers don't exactly remind you of Cal Ripken Jr.
Still, the Twins took the gamble, for two reasons. One, when he's healthy, however infrequent an occurrence that might be, he's a remarkable talent, a blend of power and speed, and a plus defender in center field to boot. In his last three seasons, his OPS+ has looked like this: 115; 125, 172.
They also were convinced that a number of his injuries were of the freakish -- rather than chronic --variety. This wasn't someone who lost time to hamstring or quad pulls or nagging knee or shoulder issues. Instead, Buxton missed time after, among other things, being hit in the hand by a pitch, fouling a ball off his foot (breaking his toe) or running into an outfield wall, separating his shoulder.
The Twins made the calculation that Buxton, at 28, would likely be healthier over the next seven years than he had been in his previous five.
Fair enough. And Buxton was off to a strong start, with three homers in his first seven games and a slugging percentage of .750. So far, so good.
Then came the first inning Friday. In his 24th at-bat of the season, Buxton hit a blooper into shallow left field, and neither Bogaerts nor Alex Verdugo could make the catch. Buxton hustled his way into second, but on the slider, jammed his knee. He immediately slammed his hand in frustration and soon left the game.
For now, the Twins are saying that it's merely a contusion and Buxton could return in a week. But watching it unfold, a week into the season, you know there had to be some private second-guessing going on.
_______________________
Rich Hill can relate.
When Baseball Twitter erupted in outrage on Wednesday when Dave Roberts pulled Clayton Kershaw, who has retired all 21 Twins he had faced. Despite a relatively modest pitch count of 80, Kershaw wasn't given an opportunity to try for what would have become baseball's 24th perfect game.
Roberts cited Kershaw's recent elbow issues, along with the shortened spring training, in rationalizing his decision. Kershaw, publicly at least, backed his manager, calling it "the right move.''
It wasn't the first time that Roberts has yanked a pitcher who had been in the midst of a perfect game. He did so to Hill in the 2016 season.
Like Kershaw, Hill was perfect through seven. And like Kershaw, his team was leading 5-0. But the combination of it being late in September and a minor blister on one of Hill's fingers convinced him that he had seen enough.
Hill measured his words carefully in recounting his own situation.
"Would it have been something that would have been amazing to accomplish?'' Hill said. "Absolutely, there's no question about that, personally and professionally. It was difficult to go through as a player, to be in a situation like that.''
Hill recalled that he placed a very animated phone call to his agent after the game, and there's video of Hill venting his frustration in the dugout.
In time, he's come to put things into context.
"I look at it from this standpoint,'' said Hill, ever diplomatic. "I'm very fortunate to be talented enough to play at this level for a long time.''