Sox, Bogaerts, Agree on $120 Million Extension
Late Sunday, the Boston Red Sox and Xander Bogaerts agreed on a $120 million extension, keeping the team’s star shortstop in Boston until at least 2025. While the deal is being reported as worth $132 million, that figure already includes the $12 million Bogaerts was going to make in 2019, so it’s kind of cheating for the sake of headline inflation. There are two other significant contract stipulations: a vesting option for 2026 worth $20 million, and an opt-out for Bogaerts following the 2022 season. The opt-out ensures that Bogaerts will at least have the option to test free agency once somewhere near his prime during his career, his first year of free agency otherwise being his age-33 season if the option doesn’t vest.
Bogaerts is in a curious position for a star player at a key position on a very popular team: he might actually be underrated. When people discuss the top shortstops in baseball, the list rightly starts with Francisco Lindor, who is the best shortstop in baseball, but then you’ll generally hear Carlos Correa and Corey Seager’s names, then maybe some talk about Andrelton Simmons because of his glove. It’s only then that Bogaerts might be thrown in as a “oh yeah, him too” selection. Bogaerts still only has one All-Star appearance, one fewer than Scott Cooper, and only received back-end MVP votes in a single season. Even in 2018, a season in which Bogaerts was hitting .284/.353/.535 in the first-half, he failed to be named to the midsummer classic’s roster.
| Rank | Name | WAR | G | AVG | OBP | SLG |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Francisco Lindor | 22.8 | 574 | .288 | .350 | .487 |
| 2 | Andrelton Simmons | 18.0 | 725 | .272 | .320 | .375 |
| 3 | Xander Bogaerts | 17.7 | 745 | .284 | .343 | .430 |
| 4 | Brandon Crawford | 16.2 | 750 | .257 | .323 | .415 |
| 5 | Carlos Correa | 15.4 | 472 | .276 | .355 | .476 |
| 6 | Corey Seager | 14.9 | 359 | .301 | .372 | .493 |
| 7 | Didi Gregorius | 14.8 | 658 | .268 | .315 | .437 |
| 8 | Asdrubal Cabrera | 12.5 | 715 | .266 | .325 | .439 |
| 9 | Jean Segura | 12.0 | 713 | .286 | .327 | .404 |
| 10 | Elvis Andrus | 11.6 | 722 | .277 | .327 | .396 |
| 11 | Trea Turner | 11.3 | 363 | .290 | .347 | .460 |
| 12 | Troy Tulowitzki | 10.8 | 419 | .279 | .347 | .467 |
| 13 | Jed Lowrie | 10.7 | 602 | .260 | .338 | .403 |
| 14 | Marcus Semien | 9.9 | 628 | .250 | .313 | .405 |
| 15 | Javier Baez | 9.9 | 530 | .268 | .310 | .473 |
| 16 | Zack Cozart | 9.7 | 505 | .249 | .314 | .414 |
| 17 | Eduardo Escobar | 9.4 | 649 | .260 | .311 | .431 |
| 18 | Trevor Story | 9.4 | 403 | .267 | .332 | .528 |
| 19 | Starlin Castro | 9.1 | 706 | .280 | .319 | .417 |
| 20 | Addison Russell | 8.8 | 533 | .242 | .313 | .392 |
But over the last five years, by WAR, only Lindor has clearly contributed more on-the-field than Bogaerts has among shortstops. So why this lack of recognition? Call it the Curse of the Well-Rounded. Bogie does nothing truly poorly, but like a number of other all-around talents, he doesn’t have that one obvious highlight to point to in a culture that likes the ten-second soundbite. He’s topped out short of 25 homers, and only hit .300 the one-time. His glove is middling as shortstops go — there’s significant disagreement between UZR and DRS here — and in sabermetric language, his WAR hovers between three and five a year, so no crazy season like Lindor’s 2018 as of yet. There’s no signature postseason home run to hang his hat on. Bogaerts has played the enchilada in a world obsessed with tacos and burritos.
At just 26, Bogaerts ranks highly enough among shortstops through the same age that he’s on a realistic Hall of Fame trajectory. He’s not on the “hit by a bus and get in” path that Mike Trout finds himself on, and there are players who also ranked highly who have fallen or will fall well short of the Hall (Hanley Ramirez, Garry Templeton, Donie Bush, probably Elvis Andrus), but it’s still an impressive list of Cooperstownerati.
| Rank | Name | WAR | G | AVG | OBP | SLG |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Alex Rodriguez | 42.8 | 952 | .311 | .378 | .571 |
| 2 | Arky Vaughan | 39.4 | 849 | .334 | .424 | .491 |
| 3 | Cal Ripken | 34.7 | 830 | .289 | .351 | .483 |
| 4 | Travis Jackson | 28.9 | 899 | .295 | .344 | .447 |
| 5 | Jim Fregosi | 27.0 | 844 | .277 | .341 | .412 |
| 6 | Joe Cronin | 25.4 | 711 | .305 | .388 | .458 |
| 7 | Lou Boudreau | 24.2 | 656 | .278 | .370 | .402 |
| 8 | Hanley Ramirez | 24.0 | 618 | .316 | .386 | .531 |
| 9 | Francisco Lindor | 22.8 | 574 | .288 | .350 | .487 |
| 10 | Robin Yount | 21.8 | 1084 | .274 | .311 | .391 |
| 11 | Jose Reyes | 21.6 | 755 | .287 | .336 | .436 |
| 12 | Donie Bush | 21.3 | 766 | .251 | .362 | .310 |
| 13 | Vern Stephens | 20.9 | 694 | .294 | .354 | .462 |
| 14 | Nomar Garciaparra | 20.0 | 455 | .322 | .367 | .566 |
| 15 | Alan Trammell | 19.7 | 850 | .280 | .350 | .383 |
| 16 | Joe Tinker | 19.6 | 693 | .250 | .299 | .326 |
| 17 | Bill Dahlen | 19.5 | 644 | .292 | .372 | .438 |
| 18 | Derek Jeter | 19.4 | 638 | .318 | .389 | .465 |
| 19 | Cecil Travis | 18.7 | 814 | .321 | .375 | .418 |
| 20 | Rabbit Maranville | 18.7 | 771 | .245 | .310 | .325 |
| 21 | Joe Sewell | 18.0 | 635 | .322 | .411 | .434 |
| 22 | Woody English | 18.0 | 659 | .306 | .376 | .407 |
| 23 | Elvis Andrus | 17.8 | 914 | .272 | .335 | .345 |
| 24 | Xander Bogaerts | 17.7 | 759 | .284 | .343 | .429 |
| 25 | Garry Templeton | 17.0 | 713 | .305 | .325 | .418 |
At $20 million, the Red Sox get a particularly good deal. Bogaerts likely left some money on the table given the fact that he’s not a two- or three-year player, but one who was only a single season away from free agency. Indeed, as someone who would have hit the market at age 27 and almost certainly is in the top five at his position, one might even characterize $20 million a year as a steal. But don’t take my word for it; what’s the fun of having the magic computer that makes projections if I’m not going to use it?
| Year | BA | OBP | SLG | AB | H | 2B | 3B | HR | BB | SO | SB | OPS+ | DR | WAR | Cumulative |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2020 | .285 | .350 | .478 | 565 | 161 | 38 | 4 | 21 | 54 | 116 | 10 | 118 | -2 | 3.9 | $31.0 |
| 2021 | .283 | .350 | .475 | 552 | 156 | 37 | 3 | 21 | 54 | 114 | 10 | 117 | -3 | 3.7 | $61.6 |
| 2022 | .281 | .349 | .471 | 537 | 151 | 36 | 3 | 20 | 53 | 108 | 9 | 116 | -4 | 3.5 | $91.6 |
| 2023 | .282 | .351 | .474 | 521 | 147 | 34 | 3 | 20 | 52 | 99 | 9 | 117 | -5 | 3.4 | $122.2 |
| 2024 | .281 | .349 | .470 | 502 | 141 | 32 | 3 | 19 | 49 | 94 | 8 | 115 | -5 | 3.0 | $150.9 |
| 2025 | .277 | .345 | .450 | 480 | 133 | 29 | 3 | 16 | 46 | 87 | 7 | 109 | -6 | 2.4 | $174.9 |
| 2026 | .272 | .335 | .441 | 456 | 124 | 26 | 3 | 15 | 41 | 79 | 6 | 104 | -7 | 1.8 | $193.6 |
ZiPS has tended to be fairly close with Red Sox signings this era (for example, it came within $2 million of Dustin Pedroia‘s extension), but this one is a very large aberration. The projections from ZiPS estimate — and this includes the risk of projecting 2020-2025 now rather than after he actually has his 2019 season in the books — that Bogaerts left roughly $50 million on the table. If the projections prove to be accurate, as free agency-year contracts go, Bogaerts’s contract will rank in the upper-echelons of big contracts that worked out well for the team, in the territory of Miguel Cabrera’s first contract. Some of that money comes back to Bogaerts in the form of his opt-out, but his downside is much better than, say, Eric Hosmer, a player with a similar opt-out clause, so it’s less of a hit to the team.
Bogaerts will likely speak more on the subject, but two issues seemed to loom large for him in the decision-making process. By all accounts he enjoys playing for the Red Sox and has shared his concerns about the Bryce Harper/Manny Machado market this winter. Add in uncertainty about baseball’s next collective bargaining agreement and it’s understandable why Bogaerts and other free agents to-be have prioritized getting long-term deals done and in the books.
Does Bogaerts end up in Cooperstown? At this point, ZiPS would say no, projecting him to end up with around 45 WAR with 2429 hits and 264 home runs, a career reminiscent of Toby Harrah’s, who was way better than you think. It’s likely some of that will take place at third base as well, which will probably hurt how he is perceived by voters. But it’s not out of the realm of possibility; ZiPS gives him a 20% chance of passing 65 WAR, a number that would make him a likely Hall of Famer, though not a first-balloter. There are 18 shortstops with 60 WAR and the only ones not in the Hall are Alex Rodriguez (who is not yet eligible and will struggle for non-playing reasons), Bill Dahlen, and Jack Glasscock. I swear I didn’t make up the last guy. A one-in-five chance at a summer speech in Cooperstown ain’t bad.
Dan Szymborski is a senior writer for FanGraphs and the developer of the ZiPS projection system. He was a writer for ESPN.com from 2010-2018, a regular guest on a number of radio shows and podcasts, and a voting BBWAA member. He also maintains a terrible Twitter account at @DSzymborski.
For some reason the please become a Fangraphs member ad at the bottom of the article, has the title as “Sox, Bogaerts, Agree on ‘0’ Million Extension”. Now that is a steal!
Nice article Dan, good work.
Especially with poetry like this:
“Bogaerts has played the enchilada in a world obsessed with tacos and burritos”
Yeah, that’s a pretty good deal. XB would have been the youngest player on the free agent market next year except for guys who get non-tendered. He’d be a four-win player entering his age 27 season. In constrast, Manny Machado was a 5-win player entering his age-26 season. I don’t know how much less than that you’d expect a guy like XB to get on the free agent market, but if 10/$300M is “fair market value” for Machado, you’re probably looking at…7/$200M? Even if you think that’s too rich, this is 6/$120M. This is a good deal for the Red Sox. A really good deal. This is the first extension of a guy in a contract year that hasn’t looked like a win for the player lately.
Keep in mind, if Bogaerts opts out after three years, you just landed a guy on a 3 year, $60M extension with all the years under 30, which is also a fantastic deal for the Red Sox.
“There are 18 shortstops with 60 WAR and the only ones not in the Hall are Alex Rodriguez (who is not yet eligible and will struggle for non-playing reasons), Bill Dahlen, and Jack Glasscock.” – What about Derek Jeter …… I know this is his first year of eligibility but how do you miss that.
Oops, yeah, Jeter too. Though we all know he’s one next year unless he turns out to be the secret power behind ISIS.
Valid
The first table is extremely misleading, all but Crawford have played fewer games than Bogaerts, and some much fewer. Bogaerts is 7th in WAR (of the players on that list) on a rate basis.
Its hard to say that its misleading given that Dan provides Games Played in the table.
Maybe not misleading, but also not really evidence that he is underrated. Solidly 3-4 WAR players don’t usually make all star teams or get MVP votes.
Actually playing in games carries value as opposed to not playing in games….
Probably more than he would of gotten in free agency jus’ sayin’
Have. [or ‘ve]
I could not be less surprised, given the caliber of your comments across FG, that you are the type of person to write “would of”.
I’m sure Jack Glasscock is familiar to much of the reading audience here. It would not shock me if the Ghost of Johnny Dickshot is on speaking terms.
Glasscock has three problems when it comes to HOF recognition. First, he’s purely a 19th century player, starting in 1879. It would be his sixth season in which he actually had to deal with an overhand pitch. Second, a great deal of his value is his defense, which is hard to quantify going that far back and there is no one alive these days to enthuse on how great a fielder he was. Third, he only gets over 60 fWAR because of his half/third season in the Union Association, a clown show of a league which, to his credit, he destroyed to a 419 batting average and general Ruthian type numbers.
It would not bother me at all if he was selected, but making a case for him is difficult to the casual fan.
Also, is “Jack Glasscock” any more ridiculous of a name than “Dick Butkus”?
Just neighing.
I’m very familiar with Glasscock, although a bunch of that probably is just because 19th century baseball is a fascination of mine. I’m probably the only person alive who thinks the ten year requirement for the Hall should be waived for Ross Barnes and Levi Meyerle. But if you go to Fangraphs’ career leaders and sort by defensive value, you’ll see Glasscock in there at 17th all time, sandwiched in between Hall of Famers Bobby Wallace and Pee Wee Reese.
Side note: looking at that list, it’s absolutely wild that Fangraphs’ recent addition of pitch framing data to catcher WAR has pushed Russel Martin and Brian McCann into the top ten all time in defensive value. Especially since it’s pushed out Andruw Jones and Rabbit Maranville from the top 10, two players specifically known for their all-time, world-class defense.
“ZiPS gives him a 20% chance of passing 65 WAR”
I think the chances of him getting to 65 WAR is a lot less than 20%. Just doing a quick search on Baseball Reference for players since 1969 who had between 15-20 WAR by the age of 25, I get a list of 37 names. Of those 37 players, 6 to 7 of them crossed 65 career WAR (Winfield crossed it but then crossed back over in his last season).
The problem is that several of those players had shown a much higher peak than Bogaerts by age 25. Thome already had seasons of 5,9 and 7.5 WAR. Schmidt had seasons of 7.7 and 9.7 WAR. Beltran had a season of 6.5 WAR. Molitor had seasons of 5.6 and 6. 2 WAR.
So that only leaves two players who show a possible path to 65 WAR for Bogaerts . Whitaker, who stayed around forever, getting 4-5 WAR a season. And Dwight Evans, who took a step forward at age 29.
Beyond those two examples, it’s hard to see a path for Bogaerts to get to 65 WAR.
(obviously using Fangraphs would give some slightly different names but I don’t think it would change the bottom line very much).
I think ZiPS is probably a bit more comprehensive than first-order napkin projections such as these. Obviously, the projection systems are well aware of precedents such as Thome, Schmidt, Beltran, etc, as well as countless others. The *nature* of Bogaerts’ WAR matters just as much as the sum total.
Thome was a defensive liability at first base even in his 20s, whereas Bogaerts has at least been passable at a significantly more challenging position. ZiPS is aware of what this implies about his aging curves, both in terms of wear and tear (injury liability), and also general athleticism.
Schmidt is perhaps a better comparison, though his defensive wizardry soars quite a bit beyond what Xander has shown (albeit at a much less challenging position). However, you’ll note that Schmidt derived a lot more of his value from his power and walk rate, whereas Bogaerts makes up some of that difference with baserunning. This is significant because baserunning tends to degrade rapidly in the early 30s, especially for infielders.
It’s a complex projection with a lot of variables. I don’t think you can really simplify it to “I found these nine or ten examples which summed up to similar WAR totals”.
Admittedly my methodology was a bit crude. But are you honestly arguing that are last 50 years of baseball history, which show us that the chances of Bogaerts reaching 65+ WAR are certainly less than 20%, is irrelevant to the discussion? Why? Because Dan has a “complex and comprehensive system”?
Well, first of all, complex and comprehensive doesn’t necessarily mean better or more accurate. And, if memory serves me correctly, no one else has ever seen his system. So no one knows what goes into it. I, for one, am not willing to hang my hat on something I´ve never seen and have no way of personally anaylzing (or at least has been analyzed by multiple experts). Finally, the system is far too new for us to have any idea how accurate its career projections are. So regardless of how complex and comprehensive it is, we simply have no idea how well it can make predictions 10-15 years into the future.
Also, 7 x 5 is 35. So it’s pretty close to 20% using your napkin as well.
You get that its regression modeling, right?
“And, if memory serves me correctly, no one else has ever seen his system. So no one knows what goes into it.”
Yes we do- the input variables that produce an ‘expected net runs’ output with the highest predictive value go into the model. Most of these inputs are well known, but then- it doesn’t hugely matter, necessarily, what various proxies and signals are called.
“Finally, the system is far too new for us to have any idea how accurate its career projections are. So regardless of how complex and comprehensive it is, we simply have no idea how well it can make predictions 10-15 years into the future.”
Back testing and years of projections give us a measurable idea of how well ZIPS estimates future runs, wins, etc.
I greatly enjoyed the use of Cooperstownerati in a sentence. Thank you, Dan!
This isn’t an April Fool’s joke, right? Surely Humphrey Bogaerts is worth more than $120 mil. The Xman is a marvel of consistency. Most of his at-bats and fielding highlights are consistently visually the same.
Hey Dan … Maybe this isn’t the right place to post this but I wanted to give the heads up that as far as I can tell the ZIPS projections aren’t posted on a few pitcher profiles (so far I don’t see it for Severino, Sean Reid-Foley, Domingo German, Chris Paddack).
Sorry if this is the wrong place to post about this but I just wanted to give a heads up.
That opt out had to the only way Boras would agree to such a deal. Or maybe he’s shifting with the times after seeing a couple of his clients get completely blanked.
Also, he’s probably looking at the # of teams with money to spend that need an upgrade at SS. I doubt the Mets would drive enough of a bidding war with the Red Sox to make the contract much bigger than this one.
I think this is the bigger driver. The Red Sox and Yankees are both losing their shortstops, but they’re the only two big spenders with a hole there. The Tigers and Orioles have spent more in the past, but they’re at the wrong place on the win curve. There are scenarios where Rosario or Swanson fall flat on their face, but neither one seems gearing up to spend a lot on a shortstop. You could argue the White Sox make as much sense as Machado did, except that he’s not a “draw” the same way. The Rangers are still paying Elvis Andrus, and the Reds seem very committed to Peraza. The Brewers, Pirates, and Marlins are not spending that money. The Mariners and Blue Jays seem to be much more wary about handing out big contracts compared to the past. The Cubs probably should be going after him, but they have Baez in-house.
This is something you see a lot of–a lot of teams that can spend a lot of money can talk themselves out of going after a position player. It’s not like pitching, where the list of teams who need pitching is endless.
Ah, yes, Scott @#$!@#! Cooper. The guy that Lou Gorman was so convinced was an All-Star that he gave away one future HOFer (Bagwell) and let another one walk away (Boggs).
One big reason why the mid-90’s Red Sox were a dumpster fire.
Assuming my conclusions of Ben Clemons’s opt-out article are correct (not a guarantee by any stretch of the imagination), an opt-out is worth roughly $8 million per year opted out of. So the value of Bogaerts’s extension (with 2026 included) is roughly $172 million and not $140 million. Still roughly $20 million short of the ZIPS projection, but at least within spitting distance of it. I actually like this deal for Bogaerts given the free-agent market downturn and the fact that he’ll have to move to 3B at some point.
X’s 2018 performance was in many ways a breakthrough year, but less visible because he missed 26 games. Looking at WAR per plate appearance, for instance, he was 16th in MLB — Machado was 14th and Arenado was 15th. In RBI/appearance, he was fifth in all of baseball. His slugging average was .60 higher than any previous year (higher than Stanton and higher than Lindor). And it wasn’t luck — his BABIP was the second-lowest in his career. The guy had a breakthrough year in 2018, but few people noticed. If he can do the same for 155 games in 2019, it will be recognized. Great deal for the Sox.