2026 Red Sox/MLB Season Thread

[Goldstar88]

He is gone. Tracy may have lost the locker room as well. What a disaster.

Bostons handling of Game 2 starter Sonny Gray didn?t sit well with some players, according to a report. Several Red Sox roster members felt a certain way about manager Chad Tracy?s quick hook in the fifth inning after Gray had thrown only 70 pitches.

Not only had their season ended, but many in the room believed Gray had been disrespected, MassLives Sean McAdam wrote on Friday.

In his candid comments, Gray mentioned his teammates likely felt similarly about his fate, as McAdam later reported.

I think you can probably ask the guys and I think they felt the same way,? Gray said. ?So, I felt strong, I felt confident, I felt convicted. But what can you do, you know??

McAdam floated the possibility that Gray had discussed his being removed from the contest early with teammates in the clubhouse before he fielded questions.

Indeed, without naming names, Gray made a point to note that others in the room were as surprised and disappointed as he was. Perhaps that, too, explains the emotional nature of Gray?s embraces as he toured the clubhouse before speaking with the media,? McAdam wrote.

Gray, who will essentially be a free agent this offseason, wouldn?t commit to pitching in 2027.

I don?t know what the future holds for me, he said. I do know that I walked off that mound with my chest back and my chin up and I can definitely be proud that I left it all out there until the ball was taken out of my hands. I still left that mound with my chest up and my chin up and I can be proud of that.?

He also said, I don?t know when asked whether he?d want to remain in Boston if he did continue his MLB career.

[BitterJim]

He is gone. Tracy may have lost the locker room as well. What a disaster.

Bostons handling of Game 2 starter Sonny Gray didn?t sit well with some players, according to a report. Several Red Sox roster members felt a certain way about manager Chad Tracy?s quick hook in the fifth inning after Gray had thrown only 70 pitches.

Not only had their season ended, but many in the room believed Gray had been disrespected, MassLives Sean McAdam wrote on Friday.

In his candid comments, Gray mentioned his teammates likely felt similarly about his fate, as McAdam later reported.

I think you can probably ask the guys and I think they felt the same way,? Gray said. ?So, I felt strong, I felt confident, I felt convicted. But what can you do, you know??

McAdam floated the possibility that Gray had discussed his being removed from the contest early with teammates in the clubhouse before he fielded questions.

Indeed, without naming names, Gray made a point to note that others in the room were as surprised and disappointed as he was. Perhaps that, too, explains the emotional nature of Gray?s embraces as he toured the clubhouse before speaking with the media,? McAdam wrote.

Gray, who will essentially be a free agent this offseason, wouldn?t commit to pitching in 2027.

I don?t know what the future holds for me, he said. I do know that I walked off that mound with my chest back and my chin up and I can definitely be proud that I left it all out there until the ball was taken out of my hands. I still left that mound with my chest up and my chin up and I can be proud of that.?

He also said, I don?t know when asked whether he?d want to remain in Boston if he did continue his MLB career.

The team got embarrassed in 2 games to their main rival. Guys being upset after that doesn't mean Tracy "lost the locker room".

[Goldstar88]

He is gone. Tracy may have lost the locker room as well. What a disaster.

Bostons handling of Game 2 starter Sonny Gray didn?t sit well with some players, according to a report. Several Red Sox roster members felt a certain way about manager Chad Tracy?s quick hook in the fifth inning after Gray had thrown only 70 pitches.

Not only had their season ended, but many in the room believed Gray had been disrespected, MassLives Sean McAdam wrote on Friday.

In his candid comments, Gray mentioned his teammates likely felt similarly about his fate, as McAdam later reported.

I think you can probably ask the guys and I think they felt the same way,? Gray said. ?So, I felt strong, I felt confident, I felt convicted. But what can you do, you know??

McAdam floated the possibility that Gray had discussed his being removed from the contest early with teammates in the clubhouse before he fielded questions.

Indeed, without naming names, Gray made a point to note that others in the room were as surprised and disappointed as he was. Perhaps that, too, explains the emotional nature of Gray?s embraces as he toured the clubhouse before speaking with the media,? McAdam wrote.

Gray, who will essentially be a free agent this offseason, wouldn?t commit to pitching in 2027.

I don?t know what the future holds for me, he said. I do know that I walked off that mound with my chest back and my chin up and I can definitely be proud that I left it all out there until the ball was taken out of my hands. I still left that mound with my chest up and my chin up and I can be proud of that.?

He also said, I don?t know when asked whether he?d want to remain in Boston if he did continue his MLB career.

The team got embarrassed in 2 games to their main rival. Guys being upset after that doesn't mean Tracy "lost the locker room".

When you have your best player as well as other guys on the team questioning your decision making, I think it is fair to say that Tracy may have lost the locker room. He was awful in the playoffs and now he is going to have to earn back the players trust. I do not think he will be able to do so with Gray, though. Doubt he comes back to Boston after that.

[Phantom255x]

They won't, but I wish they'd just move on from Story and Duran and eat some money if needed to get it done. It's probably a bit unfair, but these guys to me also represent a lot of the losing and terrible seasons that occurred especially between 2022-2024. I wonder if that's also something that rubs off in the wrong way in the clubhouse and causes a negative influence especially when you're trying to build up young players into a winning culture. Makes you wonder too, did Story coming back when he did hurt the cause in September and then the playoffs? They went on their big run without him there. And lets face it, they also just suck as players, no sugarcoating that.

Arias is an easy swap for Story at SS. And really, upgrading from Duran should be the priority. It doesn't even have to be same position, even a DH-type with power would suffice while you let Anthony grow at LF.

I still believe in Anthony (though durability concerns will persist), and I think they have some pieces in Contreras, Mead, Abreu. Arias will be here soon too. But they 1000% need another power bat in the lineup. And frankly, they needed it last year too and didn't get it.

The offense was garbage and hopeless in both playoff series the past two years. Honest conversations need to be had, and upgrades as well. I'd even make the case to dangle Rafaela/Abreu in trade packages just to see if you can get back a big bat somehow in return. Obviously I wouldn't just dump them, but explore it. Changes need to be made.

[SparzWizard]

Guess we all rooting for the Braves and Rays today

[byennie]

They won't, but I wish they'd just move on from Story and Duran and eat some money if needed to get it done. It's probably a bit unfair, but these guys to me also represent a lot of the losing and terrible seasons that occurred especially between 2022-2024. I wonder if that's also something that rubs off in the wrong way in the clubhouse and causes a negative influence especially when you're trying to build up young players into a winning culture. Makes you wonder too, did Story coming back when he did hurt the cause in September and then the playoffs? They went on their big run without him there. And lets face it, they also just suck as players, no sugarcoating that.

Arias is an easy swap for Story at SS. And really, upgrading from Duran should be the priority. It doesn't even have to be same position, even a DH-type with power would suffice while you let Anthony grow at LF.

I still believe in Anthony (though durability concerns will persist), and I think they have some pieces in Contreras, Mead, Abreu. Arias will be here soon too. But they 1000% need another power bat in the lineup. And frankly, they needed it last year too and didn't get it.

The offense was garbage and hopeless in both playoff series the past two years. Honest conversations need to be had, and upgrades as well. I'd even make the case to dangle Rafaela/Abreu in trade packages just to see if you can get back a big bat somehow in return. Obviously I wouldn't just dump them, but explore it. Changes need to be made.

Story for sure. He's washed, he's never healthy, he's a poor defender, he's never on base (8 strikeouts for every walk, geez), and his upside is basically a longshot to play and hit 20 HRs. Either cut him, or just call up Arias and let him sit until someone takes him in exchange for us paying 97% of his salary.

Duran remains a conundrum because unless he's a clubhouse problem, he still makes sense to keep. We can use 4 outfielders, especially with no DH and health problems, his contract is cheap, and there's a pretty decent chance he bounces back to 40 doubles, 20 homeruns, 20 steals and 0.250 average, with ok corner outfielder defense. We all want more, but that's someone you continue to keep unless you can get real value for him (unlikely).

Realistically we need to give Arias, Anthony, Adley, Mead a chance to contribue. Durbin, Contreras, Rafaela, Abreu aren't going anywhere. With Duran, that's a starting 9. The problems come when we're down to Sogard, Monasterio, Story, Jones... just awful to be playing those guys on the regular. We're not even deep enough to field a useful DH right now.

Hopefully Crochet can come back, Tolle + Bennett + Suarez are keepers... we'll see what happens with Gray opting out.

After that it can get pretty bleak if a lot of it doesn't come together. We already cashing in the top levels of our farm system outside of Arias, dumped several of our best young pitchers for mediocre returns, and everyone left is basically 2-3 years away. I don't see any free agents in 2027 that would be big bat even if we were spending.

[Vermont Green]

I think things look pretty good for the Sox next season overall, with a couple of exceptions.  The outfield looks really good.  Anthony and the injuries is the uncertainty here, but it should be one of the best outfields in the game, both offensively and defensively.

The infield could be a pleasant surprise, hopefully.  Mead and Durbin are young players that both have a lot of promise, but still have some things to prove.  I am optimistic.  First base with Contreras is solid.  Upper end pop and very solid defense.  SS is the big question of course.  That is where something needs to be done.  And catcher looks good.  Rutschman and Wong should be able to form a great rotation.  Rutschman kills RHP, Wong holds is own vs. LHP.

Pitching overall is still in a pretty good place, if Crochet can stay on the field (potentially a bit if).  If Crochet does not stay on the field, and Gray moves on, pitching becomes an issue.  DH is a position to address also.

It is not a lot to address to improve SS and DH, while adding around the edges of an already decent pitching staff.  The Red Sox are not going to spend like LAD or NYY or even NYM.  It isn't going to happen, and I don't think it needs to happen.  To me, it is more about spending on the right players, trading for the right players. 

[Vermont Green]

GMs have to make a lot of tough decisions.  Sign Schwarber or Story.  Rebuild with youth or sign big money FAs (or pay to keep the ones you have).  Invest in pitching or hitting.  I don't expect any GM to get everything right or to address all of a team's needs every off season.  But this team has had a lot of misses, no matter how you slice it.  Betts, Story, Sale, all misses.  They got some right too, Chapman, Gray, Abreu.  Some of the build from within has worked, Rafaela, Tolle, a lot hasn't, Mayer, Campbell (so far), even Anthony.

My point is that there is not one obvious path to building a winner. There are multiple ways to do it, and no one path is sure fire.  But the GM has to get it right.  There is nothing wrong with the concept of trading away an injury prone pitcher (Sale) or signing an all star shortstop (Story), but you simply need to be right.  If Sale kept getting injured, no one would complain, but he didn't.  If Story kept playing at an all star level, same idea.  And if your moves give the impression that they were motivated by saving money or reducing financial risk, all the worse.

Plenty of teams spend a lot of money and go nowhere.  Some teams are successful building from within and employing money ball.  In either case, it is more about getting iright than which path you choose.  Some of both is probably the best approach but the Sox are not doing either very well lately.

I do not know about that. Seems like the Dodgers found one obvious path. Also, why is it a sign Story or Schwarber? It is not like they play the same position. This is what separates the Red Sox from the Yankees.

The Red Sox are not going to be the Dodgers.  Not the Yankees or Mets either.  That is just unrealistic.  It isn't even going to be sustainable for these mega-market teams.

As to Story and Schwarber, I agree, it isn't necessarily one or the other, I never said it was.  The point I was trying to make is that whatever you do, it has to be the right thing.  It could have gone the other way; Schwarber with injuries and severely diminished production and Story could have continued at an all star level.  That is obviously what BOS thought when they chose to pass on Schwarber and to sign Story.  But they got both wrong.  They clearly thought Sale was going to continue to have durability issues, they got that wrong too.

More recently, they dealt for Rutschman, so they clearly think he will continue at an all star level.  That might turn out right, it might not.  Same with Durbin and Mead.  They are betting on Tolle and Bennett but moving on from Early, time will tell if they picked the right young pitchers to stick with.  All decisions that GMs get big money to make.  Decisions all organizations need to make.  BOS needs to start getting more of these right.

[Goldstar88]

GMs have to make a lot of tough decisions.  Sign Schwarber or Story.  Rebuild with youth or sign big money FAs (or pay to keep the ones you have).  Invest in pitching or hitting.  I don't expect any GM to get everything right or to address all of a team's needs every off season.  But this team has had a lot of misses, no matter how you slice it.  Betts, Story, Sale, all misses.  They got some right too, Chapman, Gray, Abreu.  Some of the build from within has worked, Rafaela, Tolle, a lot hasn't, Mayer, Campbell (so far), even Anthony.

My point is that there is not one obvious path to building a winner. There are multiple ways to do it, and no one path is sure fire.  But the GM has to get it right.  There is nothing wrong with the concept of trading away an injury prone pitcher (Sale) or signing an all star shortstop (Story), but you simply need to be right.  If Sale kept getting injured, no one would complain, but he didn't.  If Story kept playing at an all star level, same idea.  And if your moves give the impression that they were motivated by saving money or reducing financial risk, all the worse.

Plenty of teams spend a lot of money and go nowhere.  Some teams are successful building from within and employing money ball.  In either case, it is more about getting iright than which path you choose.  Some of both is probably the best approach but the Sox are not doing either very well lately.

I do not know about that. Seems like the Dodgers found one obvious path. Also, why is it a sign Story or Schwarber? It is not like they play the same position. This is what separates the Red Sox from the Yankees.

The Red Sox are not going to be the Dodgers.  Not the Yankees or Mets either.  That is just unrealistic.  It isn't even going to be sustainable for these mega-market teams.

As to Story and Schwarber, I agree, it isn't necessarily one or the other, I never said it was.  The point I was trying to make is that whatever you do, it has to be the right thing.  It could have gone the other way; Schwarber with injuries and severely diminished production and Story could have continued at an all star level.  That is obviously what BOS thought when they chose to pass on Schwarber and to sign Story.  But they got both wrong.  They clearly thought Sale was going to continue to have durability issues, they got that wrong too.

More recently, they dealt for Rutschman, so they clearly think he will continue at an all star level.  That might turn out right, it might not.  Same with Durbin and Mead.  They are betting on Tolle and Bennett but moving on from Early, time will tell if they picked the right young pitchers to stick with.  All decisions that GMs get big money to make.  Decisions all organizations need to make.  BOS needs to start getting more of these right.

The Red Sox lead MLB in payroll in 2018 and they won a championship that year. They did spend like the teams you mentioned above. Henry is just choosing not to do it anymore.

Also, you said above: GMs have to make a lot of tough decisions.  Sign Schwarber or Story. So that sounds like having to choose one or the other. Like they cannot afford both.

[Vermont Green]

GMs have to make a lot of tough decisions.  Sign Schwarber or Story.  Rebuild with youth or sign big money FAs (or pay to keep the ones you have).  Invest in pitching or hitting.  I don't expect any GM to get everything right or to address all of a team's needs every off season.  But this team has had a lot of misses, no matter how you slice it.  Betts, Story, Sale, all misses.  They got some right too, Chapman, Gray, Abreu.  Some of the build from within has worked, Rafaela, Tolle, a lot hasn't, Mayer, Campbell (so far), even Anthony.

My point is that there is not one obvious path to building a winner. There are multiple ways to do it, and no one path is sure fire.  But the GM has to get it right.  There is nothing wrong with the concept of trading away an injury prone pitcher (Sale) or signing an all star shortstop (Story), but you simply need to be right.  If Sale kept getting injured, no one would complain, but he didn't.  If Story kept playing at an all star level, same idea.  And if your moves give the impression that they were motivated by saving money or reducing financial risk, all the worse.

Plenty of teams spend a lot of money and go nowhere.  Some teams are successful building from within and employing money ball.  In either case, it is more about getting iright than which path you choose.  Some of both is probably the best approach but the Sox are not doing either very well lately.

I do not know about that. Seems like the Dodgers found one obvious path. Also, why is it a sign Story or Schwarber? It is not like they play the same position. This is what separates the Red Sox from the Yankees.

The Red Sox are not going to be the Dodgers.  Not the Yankees or Mets either.  That is just unrealistic.  It isn't even going to be sustainable for these mega-market teams.

As to Story and Schwarber, I agree, it isn't necessarily one or the other, I never said it was.  The point I was trying to make is that whatever you do, it has to be the right thing.  It could have gone the other way; Schwarber with injuries and severely diminished production and Story could have continued at an all star level.  That is obviously what BOS thought when they chose to pass on Schwarber and to sign Story.  But they got both wrong.  They clearly thought Sale was going to continue to have durability issues, they got that wrong too.

More recently, they dealt for Rutschman, so they clearly think he will continue at an all star level.  That might turn out right, it might not.  Same with Durbin and Mead.  They are betting on Tolle and Bennett but moving on from Early, time will tell if they picked the right young pitchers to stick with.  All decisions that GMs get big money to make.  Decisions all organizations need to make.  BOS needs to start getting more of these right.

The Red Sox lead MLB in payroll in 2018 and they won a championship that year. They did spend like the teams you mentioned above. Henry is just choosing not to do it anymore.

Also, you said above: GMs have to make a lot of tough decisions.  Sign Schwarber or Story. So that sounds like having to choose one or the other. Like they cannot afford both.

I have tried to say it every way I can to be clear, Schwarber was one decision, Story was another decision.  Neither has aged well.  I don't know how much clearer I can be.

And unless there is a lock out and major changes to the CBA, no one is going to outspend the mega-markets anymore.  I don't think it is realistic to expect the Red Sox to outspend the Dodgers.  There is not reason the Red Sox can't be in say the top 5 or so.

[byennie]

GMs have to make a lot of tough decisions.  Sign Schwarber or Story.  Rebuild with youth or sign big money FAs (or pay to keep the ones you have).  Invest in pitching or hitting.  I don't expect any GM to get everything right or to address all of a team's needs every off season.  But this team has had a lot of misses, no matter how you slice it.  Betts, Story, Sale, all misses.  They got some right too, Chapman, Gray, Abreu.  Some of the build from within has worked, Rafaela, Tolle, a lot hasn't, Mayer, Campbell (so far), even Anthony.

My point is that there is not one obvious path to building a winner. There are multiple ways to do it, and no one path is sure fire.  But the GM has to get it right.  There is nothing wrong with the concept of trading away an injury prone pitcher (Sale) or signing an all star shortstop (Story), but you simply need to be right.  If Sale kept getting injured, no one would complain, but he didn't.  If Story kept playing at an all star level, same idea.  And if your moves give the impression that they were motivated by saving money or reducing financial risk, all the worse.

Plenty of teams spend a lot of money and go nowhere.  Some teams are successful building from within and employing money ball.  In either case, it is more about getting iright than which path you choose.  Some of both is probably the best approach but the Sox are not doing either very well lately.

I do not know about that. Seems like the Dodgers found one obvious path. Also, why is it a sign Story or Schwarber? It is not like they play the same position. This is what separates the Red Sox from the Yankees.

The Red Sox are not going to be the Dodgers.  Not the Yankees or Mets either.  That is just unrealistic.  It isn't even going to be sustainable for these mega-market teams.

As to Story and Schwarber, I agree, it isn't necessarily one or the other, I never said it was.  The point I was trying to make is that whatever you do, it has to be the right thing.  It could have gone the other way; Schwarber with injuries and severely diminished production and Story could have continued at an all star level.  That is obviously what BOS thought when they chose to pass on Schwarber and to sign Story.  But they got both wrong.  They clearly thought Sale was going to continue to have durability issues, they got that wrong too.

More recently, they dealt for Rutschman, so they clearly think he will continue at an all star level.  That might turn out right, it might not.  Same with Durbin and Mead.  They are betting on Tolle and Bennett but moving on from Early, time will tell if they picked the right young pitchers to stick with.  All decisions that GMs get big money to make.  Decisions all organizations need to make.  BOS needs to start getting more of these right.

The Red Sox lead MLB in payroll in 2018 and they won a championship that year. They did spend like the teams you mentioned above. Henry is just choosing not to do it anymore.

Also, you said above: GMs have to make a lot of tough decisions.  Sign Schwarber or Story. So that sounds like having to choose one or the other. Like they cannot afford both.

I have tried to say it every way I can to be clear, Schwarber was one decision, Story was another decision.  Neither has aged well.  I don't know how much clearer I can be.

And unless there is a lock out and major changes to the CBA, no one is going to outspend the mega-markets anymore.  I don't think it is realistic to expect the Red Sox to outspend the Dodgers.  There is not reason the Red Sox can't be in say the top 5 or so.

To be fair, the Dodgers are a whole separate issue. They outspend every other team by over $100M. The Sox are closer to the A's in salary than the Dodgers.

That said, teams like PHI, NYY, NYM, SD, WAS, ATL all seem to be passing us.

The irony, I think, it that each time we decline to sign someone, we seem to end up paying just as much in reclamation projects and replacements. That's the real combined crime here. Just horrific long-term management.

Buehler: $20M
Sandoval: $13M
Giolito: $19M
Story + Yoshida: ~$40M

We could literally just have kept Mookie Betts for his entire career (and made him our SS like the Dodgers did), Nate Eovaldi and Kyle Schwarber on the roster for what we completely wasted on garbage pickups.

Instead, not one of those 5 guys belongs on our roster next year. All in the name of "savings".

[Vermont Green]

To be fair, the Dodgers are a whole separate issue. They outspend every other team by over $100M. The Sox are closer to the A's in salary than the Dodgers.

That said, teams like PHI, NYY, NYM, SD, WAS, ATL all seem to be passing us.

The irony, I think, it that each time we decline to sign someone, we seem to end up paying just as much in reclamation projects and replacements. That's the real combined crime here. Just horrific long-term management.

Buehler: $20M
Sandoval: $13M
Giolito: $19M
Story + Yoshida: ~$40M

We could literally just have kept Mookie Betts for his entire career (and made him our SS like the Dodgers did), Nate Eovaldi and Kyle Schwarber on the roster for what we completely wasted on garbage pickups.

Instead, not one of those 5 guys belongs on our roster next year. All in the name of "savings".

I don't disagree and this actually supports my point.  The Red Sox have been trying to build the team lately with less of the brute force spending that teams like the Dodgers are able to do.  Maybe the Red Sox don't need to reduce their "brute force" spending, but they are.  I think what they want to do is do some of both, build as much of the team the MIL way or the TB way, and then do as little of the big spending as possible.

The problem with this is that they are not making the right calls.  MIL and TB seem to be doing this much better than BOS is.  The players they are developing are not developing all that well.  The players they are choosing to spend money on are getting hurt or otherwise not performing well.  They trade away Sale for less than nothing and he becomes a Cy Young candidate.

I hear a lot of fans saying they think the Sox are cheap or not spending enough for whatever reason.  But if you spend the money on the wrong players, it isn't going to help the team win.  Just ask Mets fans how that is working.  The Sox could have spent what they spent better.  They could have held on to Sale instead of trading him for nothing and paying Buehler (for example).  They also could have spent more.  But I feel they had plenty of opportunity to have a better team spending what they spent.

The Red Sox spent just under $200M.  4 AL teams spent more, NYY, TOR, HOU, and DET.  Only one of those teams had a better record.  In the NL, LAD, NYM, PHI, ATL, and CHI all spent a lot more.  SD and ARI spent a little more.  PHI, for example, spent $90M more and got one 1 more regular season win and also got bounced in the Wildcard.  If the Red Sox were to spend say $90M more (to be more on par with PHI) it is no guarantee unless they figure out how to spend it more wisely.  Now if they were to spend $150M or $200M more , maybe they could cover up more of the bad spending mistakes, but I don't see them being the NYM or LAD.

[byennie]

To be fair, the Dodgers are a whole separate issue. They outspend every other team by over $100M. The Sox are closer to the A's in salary than the Dodgers.

That said, teams like PHI, NYY, NYM, SD, WAS, ATL all seem to be passing us.

The irony, I think, it that each time we decline to sign someone, we seem to end up paying just as much in reclamation projects and replacements. That's the real combined crime here. Just horrific long-term management.

Buehler: $20M
Sandoval: $13M
Giolito: $19M
Story + Yoshida: ~$40M

We could literally just have kept Mookie Betts for his entire career (and made him our SS like the Dodgers did), Nate Eovaldi and Kyle Schwarber on the roster for what we completely wasted on garbage pickups.

Instead, not one of those 5 guys belongs on our roster next year. All in the name of "savings".

I don't disagree and this actually supports my point.  The Red Sox have been trying to build the team lately with less of the brute force spending that teams like the Dodgers are able to do.  Maybe the Red Sox don't need to reduce their "brute force" spending, but they are.  I think what they want to do is do some of both, build as much of the team the MIL way or the TB way, and then do as little of the big spending as possible.

The problem with this is that they are not making the right calls.  MIL and TB seem to be doing this much better than BOS is.  The players they are developing are not developing all that well.  The players they are choosing to spend money on are getting hurt or otherwise not performing well.  They trade away Sale for less than nothing and he becomes a Cy Young candidate.

I hear a lot of fans saying they think the Sox are cheap or not spending enough for whatever reason.  But if you spend the money on the wrong players, it isn't going to help the team win.  Just ask Mets fans how that is working.  The Sox could have spent what they spent better.  They could have held on to Sale instead of trading him for nothing and paying Buehler (for example).  They also could have spent more.  But I feel they had plenty of opportunity to have a better team spending what they spent.

The Red Sox spent just under $200M.  4 AL teams spent more, NYY, TOR, HOU, and DET.  Only one of those teams had a better record.  In the NL, LAD, NYM, PHI, ATL, and CHI all spent a lot more.  SD and ARI spent a little more.  PHI, for example, spent $90M more and got one 1 more regular season win and also got bounced in the Wildcard.  If the Red Sox were to spend say $90M more (to be more on par with PHI) it is no guarantee unless they figure out how to spend it more wisely.  Now if they were to spend $150M or $200M more , maybe they could cover up more of the bad spending mistakes, but I don't see them being the NYM or LAD.

I mean it does and it doesn't. I think we agree that you can't just pinpoint one thing (spending or choices), but you also just listed 12 teams outspending us. That suggests we're a mid-market team, but we're not.

Boston has the 3rd or 4th highest revenue in the league, only the Yankees and Dodgers are well ahead. We are the most financially profitable team in the league by a wide margin... we KEEP $100M more than those teams in our owners' pockets. All we'd have to do is reduce profits to the level of the Yankees to sign 2-3 star players at $30M-$40M each.

As for Milwaukee, of course ownership wants to be Milwaukee. Then they get to spend like a mid-market team, still win, and keep the extra BILLIONS of dollars for themselves.

[rocknrollforyoursoul]

Milwaukee and Tampa Bay haven?t been winning titles, so their way of doing things can?t be all that great. Moneyball is a decent way of staying competitive in the regular season, but it rarely leads to the ultimate prize. Boston needs to start spending big on proven players who aren?t washed up, injury prone, or reclamation projects. And the Sox need to stop thinking that most of their prospects are gonna turn into studs.

[Vermont Green]

To be fair, the Dodgers are a whole separate issue. They outspend every other team by over $100M. The Sox are closer to the A's in salary than the Dodgers.

That said, teams like PHI, NYY, NYM, SD, WAS, ATL all seem to be passing us.

The irony, I think, it that each time we decline to sign someone, we seem to end up paying just as much in reclamation projects and replacements. That's the real combined crime here. Just horrific long-term management.

Buehler: $20M
Sandoval: $13M
Giolito: $19M
Story + Yoshida: ~$40M

We could literally just have kept Mookie Betts for his entire career (and made him our SS like the Dodgers did), Nate Eovaldi and Kyle Schwarber on the roster for what we completely wasted on garbage pickups.

Instead, not one of those 5 guys belongs on our roster next year. All in the name of "savings".

I don't disagree and this actually supports my point.  The Red Sox have been trying to build the team lately with less of the brute force spending that teams like the Dodgers are able to do.  Maybe the Red Sox don't need to reduce their "brute force" spending, but they are.  I think what they want to do is do some of both, build as much of the team the MIL way or the TB way, and then do as little of the big spending as possible.

The problem with this is that they are not making the right calls.  MIL and TB seem to be doing this much better than BOS is.  The players they are developing are not developing all that well.  The players they are choosing to spend money on are getting hurt or otherwise not performing well.  They trade away Sale for less than nothing and he becomes a Cy Young candidate.

I hear a lot of fans saying they think the Sox are cheap or not spending enough for whatever reason.  But if you spend the money on the wrong players, it isn't going to help the team win.  Just ask Mets fans how that is working.  The Sox could have spent what they spent better.  They could have held on to Sale instead of trading him for nothing and paying Buehler (for example).  They also could have spent more.  But I feel they had plenty of opportunity to have a better team spending what they spent.

The Red Sox spent just under $200M.  4 AL teams spent more, NYY, TOR, HOU, and DET.  Only one of those teams had a better record.  In the NL, LAD, NYM, PHI, ATL, and CHI all spent a lot more.  SD and ARI spent a little more.  PHI, for example, spent $90M more and got one 1 more regular season win and also got bounced in the Wildcard.  If the Red Sox were to spend say $90M more (to be more on par with PHI) it is no guarantee unless they figure out how to spend it more wisely.  Now if they were to spend $150M or $200M more , maybe they could cover up more of the bad spending mistakes, but I don't see them being the NYM or LAD.

I mean it does and it doesn't. I think we agree that you can't just pinpoint one thing (spending or choices), but you also just listed 12 teams outspending us. That suggests we're a mid-market team, but we're not.

Boston has the 3rd or 4th highest revenue in the league, only the Yankees and Dodgers are well ahead. We are the most financially profitable team in the league by a wide margin... we KEEP $100M more than those teams in our owners' pockets. All we'd have to do is reduce profits to the level of the Yankees to sign 2-3 star players at $30M-$40M each.

As for Milwaukee, of course ownership wants to be Milwaukee. Then they get to spend like a mid-market team, still win, and keep the extra BILLIONS of dollars for themselves.

I see the Red Sox as having gone through a sort of reset.  They were purging what they viewed as bad deals (financially).  They wanted to get some level of a core team that is based on lower cost, controlled players (the MIL or TB way).  They have that now, for better or for worse.  Now hopefully they will be willing to spend like the other big market teams to address the remaining needs.  They have in the past.

If a $200M team got them 87 wins and a wildcard, now they need to go to say $250M.  Go out and buy a thumper DH.  Maybe another big name starter.  They should be more willing to spend on this current team than say the team as it was 3-4 years ago.  But they still need to pick the right players to spend on or they will still be an 87 win team.