It’s a tough year to argue any Major League Baseball contract given to an impact player that’s under $200 million.
That being said, the Boston Red Sox should be praised for what they’ve accomplished over the last month.
On the field, it hasn’t looked pretty for the Sox, who’ve struggled on the West Coast since opening the regular season last week in Seattle. But off the field and in the front office, the Red Sox organization has been able to lock up both Chris Sale and Xander Bogaerts to long-term extensions at a combined $265 million, which is much less than some of the signings made around the league this past winter.
It’s $35 million less than the 10-year, $300 million deal that Manny Machado signed with the San Diego Padres. It’s $65 million less than the 13-year, $330 million contract that Bryce Harper signed with the Philadelphia Phillies. And it’s $165 million less than the 12-year, $430 million extension that Mike Trout signed with the Los Angeles Angels.
Heck, you can even combine the Sale and Bogaerts extensions with J.D. Martinez’ five-year, $110 million deal that he signed with Boston last winter, and it’s still $55 million less than Trout’s deal.
Is anyone really able to knock the Red Sox for that? They shouldn’t be. The Sox should be praised for signing three impact players for less than what the Angels are paying Trout.
That’s not a knock on Trout either. He’s an elite, superstar talent. But who would you rather be right now, the Angels or the Red Sox?
The answer should be simple. Even though the 2019 World Series championship defense has not begun the way anybody in Boston would like, that doesn’t mean the Red Sox are going to be worse than the Angels when it’s all said and done.
Sure, Sale’s velocity is down at the moment. And Bogaerts doesn’t get the respect he probably should in this town. But to lock up your ace and your 26-year-old starting shortstop with contracts that each total less than $150 million, it would be insane for anyone to criticize the Red Sox for overpaying their talent. Because if anything at all — especially going back to the Martinez deal — they’ve been able to sign impact players at less than the going rate, which is now somewhere between $300 million and $400 million, it seems.
If the Red Sox didn’t sign Sale to a five-year, $145 million deal, there would be outrage similar to what came after the “lowball” offer they made to Jon Lester several years ago. If they didn’t sign Bogaerts, there’s no doubt he would’ve signed with someone next winter as a free agent for $25 million a year, instead of the $20 million per year he’ll now make under his six-year, $120 million extension.
The question shouldn’t be, “Did they give Sale and Bogaerts too much money?” Instead, it should be, “Can they now pull off the same type of ‘discount’ with Mookie Betts?”
Betts isn’t set to hit free agency until after the 2020 season. But he’s reportedly rejected several offers from the Red Sox over the last two years. He even went on the record in spring training saying he doesn’t expect to sign anything until free agency. So, either Betts just wants the Sox to make him a larger offer right now, or he’s going to test to market in order to try and top Trout’s $430 million.
What if I told you the Red Sox could prevent that by offering Betts, let’s say, a 10-year, $350 million extension right now? If he ever rejected that, then we’d know he’s looking to top Trout’s deal. We’d also have to acknowledge the Red Sox for making a pretty solid offer, higher than what both Machado and Harper just signed for.
If Betts accepted that, then it would be another example of the Red Sox doing a fantastic job keeping a championship contender together, at less than market value.
Because seeing all these crazy contracts being dished out, it’s a tough year to argue the money the Red Sox are spending.
Listen to “The Danny Picard Show” on PodcastOne, iTunes, and Spotify. Follow him on Twitter @DannyPicard. Subscribe to YouTube.com/DannyPicard.
