Details emerge on why the Red Sox traded Rafael Devers

The Boston Red Sox have traded Rafael Devers. But why?

We know the who, what, when, and where at this point. The Sox sent Devers to the San Francisco Giants late on Father's Day, mere hours after they had completed a sweep of the New York Yankees at Fenway Park. They received four players in return -- two marginal major-league players, and two intriguing-if-underwhelming prospects.

But the "why" of the deal wasn't as clear -- until more details emerged in the ensuing reports from top Red Sox insiders. There's one clear reason at the top of the list, a financial one. But Sox brass certainly weren't going to admit that in their Monday night video conference with the media. Nothing they say can be taken at face value.

With that in mind, here's a rundown of the key reports that have come out in the wake of Sunday's stunning Devers blockbuster...

^{Rafael Devers}

Devers had just begun year two of a 10-year, $313.5 million contract extension with the Red Sox, and now, the Giants are paying every remaining dime of it.

If you'll remember, the Devers extension came mere days after fans at Fenway Park booed John Henry during the 2023 Winter Classic. He was basically bullied into a contract that he never wanted to pay in the first place. So, Henry was surely thrilled when he heard that the Red Sox were able to unload the whole thing.

Devers has nine seasons (including 2025) and more than $250 million left on his deal. He will average $28.5 million over the final seven years, which carries through his age-36 season. The fact that the Red Sox didn't retain any of it will earn them little support when they try to call this a "baseball trade," as team president Sam Kennedy did Monday night.

This raises questions of how they're going to handle the contract situations for rising young stars Marcelo Mayer (a Scott Boras client) and Roman Anthony. Kennedy can throw the World Series banners in our faces all he wants. The club has dissolved all faith that it will do the right thing with expensive star players.

^{John Henry}

You better not take too long to respond to John Henry's messages, or you'll be fired! That's the perception of the Devers dump, based on comments made by Buster Olney on "Sunday Night Baseball," shortly after news of the trade had broken.

“[Devers] had reached an impasse with the Red Sox," Olney said. "Getting text messages from executives, other teams been talking with the Red Sox. They basically are saying that after Devers did not respond following John Henry getting on a plane and going out to Kansas City, and he didn't take ground balls after that, the perception of other teams was, ‘Yeah, he was gone.’

"Red Sox were going to move him when he didn't respond to the owner who was paying him that contract.”

One would hope that the trade didn't happen solely because Devers besmirched his owner. That was probably just the last straw for a player that had completely checked out from everything outside of swinging a bat.

^{Rafael Devers}

Getting Devers' contract off the books was ostensibly a top priority for the Red Sox. Devers' off-field behavior gave them a convenient excuse to do so.

In his initial report on the trade, Peter Abraham of the Boston Globe seemed to echo an important sentiment from the Red Sox front office. As a player being paid more than $30 million, Devers was expected to carry certain responsibilities beyond just playing, and he fell short of expectations in that department:

"A team source said Sunday that the feeling was Devers had not lived up to the responsibilities that come with one of the largest contracts in the game. His unwillingness to change positions for the sake of the team was seen as a step too far, especially for a club increasingly reliant on young, impressionable players."

In short, Devers was not, and really never was, a good leadership presence or the kind of player that set a good example behind the scenes. While obviously an excellent, arguably irreplaceable hitter, Devers was expected to match that excellence in the clubhouse, and he shirked those responsibilities.

^{Kristian Campbell}

Devers has been honest in the past about his reluctance or inability to be a team leader. It makes it all the more frustrating and confusing that the Red Sox chose him to be their high-priced long-term leader over Mookie Betts or Xander Bogaerts. But another new report suggests that clubhouse issues with Devers reached unhealthy levels.

According to Joon Lee at Yahoo! Sports, Devers at one point directed his ire toward rookie teammate Kristian Campbell. After Devers had very publicly refused to play first base in the wake of a season-ending injury to Triston Casas, Campbell reportedly volunteered to play first himself. Devers took this as a "slight to his own stature," according to Lee.

Ironically, this behavior only further exposed Devers' inability to understand what it means to be a good leader or teammate. Campbell was likely just offering to do what was best for the team, and Devers didn't even grasp the concept.

This feels like a mere taste of what's possibly to come, as far as inside stories about what led to the trade.

^{Rafael Devers}

This one is more muddy. The truth is likely somewhere in the middle.

According to MassLive's Chris Cotillo, Devers "did not demand a trade" amid discussions involving the team. However, chief baseball officer Craig Breslow indicated that conversations with Devers' camp led to the belief that "perhaps a fresh start would be best for both sides."

This is the one comment from management that sounds believable on the surface. Devers was unhappy, and the team was unhappy with both his behavior and his paychecks.

So, Devers may not have exactly kicked down the door to Breslow's office and demanded a trade, but the internal discussions ostensibly led everyone to agree that it was time for a clean break. Another convenient excuse for Henry to dump the contract, but considering Devers' displeasure with the organization and the disruptions he seemed to cause, a mutual decision to part ways would make sense.

It just doesn't make the return on the trade any less appealing. And it inspires little confidence that the money saved by moving Devers will be put to good use.