Dear John Henry: Stop Treating the 2026 Red Sox Like the 2018 Red Sox

Substack article here

Dear Mr. Henry,

The Red Sox front office needs to stop treating the 2026 roster like it is already the 2018 roster.

It is not.

That does not mean this team lacks talent. The opposite is true. Roman Anthony, Marcelo Mayer, Ceddanne Rafaela, Wilyer Abreu, Jarren Duran, Carlos Narváez, Brayan Bello, Garrett Crochet, Payton Tolle, Connelly Early, Kristian Campbell, Franklin Arias and others could form the foundation of the next legitimate Red Sox core.

But a potential core is not the same thing as an established core.

And that distinction matters.

The 2018 Red Sox were young, but they were not newly assembled. By the time that team won the World Series, Xander Bogaerts, Jackie Bradley Jr. and Brock Holt had been in Boston since 2013. Mookie Betts and Christian Vázquez had been there since 2014. Andrew Benintendi had debuted in 2016. Rafael Devers was the newer piece, but even he was not entering an empty room.

He was joining a lineup that already knew what it was.

That group had already experienced failure, adjustment, playoff pressure, clubhouse change, media scrutiny, role definition and the daily weight of playing in Boston. They had played together. They had lost together. They had adjusted together. They had built trust together.

The 2018 Red Sox were not just a collection of young talent.

They were a young core who, together, had accumulated significant MLB experience.

The 2026 Red Sox are not there yet.

Anthony has not had a full major-league season. Mayer has barely begun his major-league career. Narváez only recently arrived. Rafaela and Abreu have meaningful experience, but they are still emerging players, not long-established anchors. Duran has become one of the more important continuity pieces, but he cannot be the entire connective tissue of the offense.

The danger is not building around young players.

They should be building around young players.

The danger is asking projected core players to function like finished core players before they have had the time, stability, role clarity and veteran support required to become one.

The Offense Is Not a Bullpen

The biggest mistake your front office is currently making is treating the offense like it can be assembled the same way as a bullpen.

It cannot.

A bullpen can be more modular. You can cycle arms, chase matchups, option relievers, ride hot hands and replace one narrow role with another. That does not mean bullpen construction is easy, but the pieces are more interchangeable by nature.

A lineup is different.

The starting nine are not just a collection of individual player values. They are a living, breathing collective. They have to hold together over time. They have to support each other. They have to create pressure in different ways.

A good lineup needs balance. It needs left-handed and right-handed threats. It needs contact and damage. It needs speed and patience. It needs hitters who can handle velocity, hitters who punish mistakes, hitters who fit Fenway, and veterans who can absorb pressure when young players struggle.

You cannot build an offense by constantly shuffling parts and assuming the output will stay the same.

A hitter’s performance is shaped by the lineup around him. Who bats before him matters. Who protects him matters. His defensive responsibility matters. His role matters. Whether he is being asked to learn major-league pitching while also moving positions matters. Whether the bench protects him from bad matchups matters. Whether there is a veteran nearby who can absorb pressure matters.

That is why offensive continuity is different from pitching churn.

A lineup needs rhythm, trust, identity and time. It needs players who understand how their roles fit together. The best Red Sox offenses were not just talented. They made sense together.

The 2004 lineup had identity and contrast.

The 2013 lineup worked because the roles were clean.

The 2018 lineup had structure. Betts set the tone. Bogaerts stabilized the middle. J.D. Martinez protected the entire offense. Benintendi, Devers, Bradley, Moreland, Pearce, Holt, Vázquez and others had lanes.

Those lineups were not built like waiver-wire bullpens.

They were built like offenses.

That is what your front office needs to understand.

This offense cannot simply be told to “figure it out.” It has to be built so the players make sense together. The lineup needs to become a team, not a spreadsheet.

Useful Is Not Enough

This is where the Red Sox need to look honestly at the bench and the complementary pieces currently on the roster.

This does not have to be personal. Masataka Yoshida and Isiah Kiner-Falefa are useful major-league players. That is not the question.

The question is whether their roster spots help this specific Red Sox team become what it is trying to become.

That is where the front office needs to be disciplined.

This is not a bullpen. You cannot just collect useful pieces and assume the group will function. A lineup has to fit together. A bench has to make the starters better. The non-core roster spots have to solve actual problems.

For this version of the Red Sox, every non-core position-player spot should clearly do at least two of five things:

Protect the young hitters. Crush left-handed pitching. Bring Fenway-specific offense. Cover injuries. Stabilize the defense.

If a player only does one of those things, the roster spot should be questioned.

That does not mean giving players away. It means being honest about fit.

Yoshida may still have offensive value. But if his presence clogs the LF/DH lane for Roman Anthony, limits roster flexibility and does not solve the lineup’s need for right-handed balance, then the Red Sox have to ask whether his value could be better used in a different roster construction.

IKF may still have value as a versatile major-league player. But if the roster already has multiple players who can cover utility and infield insurance, then the front office has to ask whether that roster spot could be used to address a more specific need.

The point is not to move players just to move them.

The point is to stop keeping “useful” players who do not fit the team you are trying to build.

A Refsnyder-type bat matters because the role is specific. He does not have to be a star. He does not even have to be a traditional power hitter. His value is that he protects young left-handed hitters, handles left-handed pitching, gives the bench a defined offensive identity and brings a swing profile that can work at Fenway.

That is the kind of clarity this roster needs.

The Red Sox should look at the bench they currently have and ask whether those pieces are helping the young core, balancing the lineup and creating cleaner roles.

If not, then those players should become paths to acquire what is missing.

Not because they are bad players.

Because useful is not enough.

Fit matters.

And for this Red Sox team, every roster spot has to help turn talent into a team. Not by collecting names. By defining jobs.

The front office should not be asking, “Is this player useful?”

They should be asking, “What problem does this player solve for this roster?”

If the answer is unclear, the spot should be reconsidered.

The Deadline Should Support the Core, Not Reset It

This is why the trade deadline matters so much.

If the Red Sox want to compete in 2026, they should compete. They should not wave away the season just because the roster is young. They should not tell the clubhouse, the fan base or the young players that this year is only a waiting room for the future.

Trying to win matters.

But trying to win and pretending the core is already mature are not the same thing.

The deadline should be used to support the young core, not reset it.

The Red Sox should not chase activity for the sake of activity. They should not make moves that interrupt the continuity they are trying to build. They should not trade away the very players who are learning how to become a team together just to patch a problem that clearer roster construction could solve.

Every deadline move should have to meet the same standard as every bench spot.

It should clearly do at least two of five things:

Protect the young hitters. Crush left-handed pitching. Bring Fenway-specific offense. Cover injuries. Stabilize the defense.

If a move does not clearly do at least two of those things, it should not be made.

If Yoshida blocks the DH/LF lane, explore whether his value can help solve a more specific roster need.

If IKF duplicates skills already on the roster, explore whether that spot can become a more defined offensive fit.

If the bench lacks right-handed damage, acquire that specific player.

But do not trade Arias, Cespedes, Gonzales, Brannon, Yophery or other future position-player pieces simply to patch a roster-fit problem that could be solved with more discipline.

The 2026 deadline should be about supporting the core, not resetting it.

That means looking for a right-handed bat who punishes lefties.

It means looking for Fenway-specific offense.

It means adding defensive stability, not more positional chaos.

It means finding injury insurance with a defined job.

It means adding pitching only if it does not come at the cost of offensive continuity.

The front office can add pitching. Every contender needs arms. But they should not use the deadline as an excuse to strip away the position-player continuity they are trying to create.

Bullpen pieces are more interchangeable.

Lineups need rhythm, trust, balance and time.

Stop Mistaking Movement for Construction

Mr. Henry, your front office does not need less ambition.

They need better discipline.

They need to stop treating the 2026 roster like it is already the 2018 roster.

The 2018 team had a young core, but that core had already lived together in Boston. It had experience, roles, hierarchy, shared failure, shared success and veteran support.

The 2026 group is still becoming that.

The front office’s job is not to prove it is the smartest group in the room by constantly moving pieces.

The job is to build the conditions in which those pieces can become a team.

That means defining roles.

Protecting young hitters.

Building a lineup that functions collectively.

Using Worcester as support, not as a panic button.

Adding veterans who clarify instead of clutter.

Using current roster value to acquire what is actually missing.

Keeping the players who are becoming the future or are supporting the future.

And making deadline moves that reinforce continuity instead of destroying it.

The offense should be treated as a living, breathing collective, not a pile of interchangeable parts.

Pitching staffs can survive more churn.

Lineups need rhythm, trust, balance, role clarity and time.

If the Red Sox want Anthony, Mayer, Rafaela, Abreu, Duran and the rest of this young group to become something real, they have to stop interrupting the process before it becomes a team.

The madness is not trying to win.

The madness is pretending that talent automatically becomes continuity.

It does not.

Continuity has to be built.

Roles have to be protected.

Chemistry has to be allowed to form.

And the deadline should be used to support that process, not blow it up.

The 2026 Red Sox do not need to be treated like the 2018 Red Sox.

They need to be treated like what they are: a talented team still becoming a core.

Sincerely,

A Red Sox fan who remembers what real Red Sox roster construction looks like.