2014 Red Sox Rotation

It undermines your argument because, equipped with a brand new ligament and much better velocity, we don't have any idea what "high" really means, do we? Using the only data point in this time series - this year's performance - this may be the new normal, at least till the arm wears down again. The injury does seem to have concentrated his attention on preparation and performance. He's in as good a shape as any pitcher on the team, I'd say.

Your conjecture is about a presumed future for which we have no information outside of his performance so far. In other words it's a guess. You're asking us to believe that what we see now isn't real, but that what you see in the future is. Based on that conjecture, you feel he should be traded away for a second-tier prospect. That's a bit of a leap.

I will post on this in 218 games and we'll see.

Yea because if something happens with Lackey that'd mean you were right. That B level prospect still wouldn't have been worth the chance Lackey repeats this year.

What current Sox Prospects do you consider B level so we have an idea as to what you think is worth giving up 2 seasons at low money of a potential number 2.

To clarify and only to clarify (not posting any new arguments), the 3.93 mark was the average ERA in the years where he pitched at least 27 games in his career subtracting 2011 for obvious reasons and 2008 because he only made 24 starts.

If something injury-related happens to Lackey during the 2014 season than I would consider myself to be about 1/5 right because a pitcher of his age comes with an injury risk and that has to factor into keeping or trading him.

My definition of a B-level prospect that I would sell him for is a Ranaudo (Near-Surefire #3 Starter) and now that I think about it probably a 18-19 year old lottery ticket pitcher like Montas or a young, middle reliever in addition to that Ranaudo type prospect (I admit that this is inconsistent with my other posts, but he does seem a little more valuable then I first assessed).

One thing I saw that I want to clarify is that Lackey is at 2 years at 16 million, but he is being paid 15 million in the first year and the minimum in the final year so it's not 8 mil and 8 mil each for the two years.

Also, what I would consider a "successful" outcome from my standpoint is that in 2014 Lackey pitches like a good #4 (around a 3.95 to 4.15 in ERA) and a prospect comes up and pitches at a 4.20 ERA or somewhere in the same neighborhood in his spot starts (which you all seem to think are going to be plentiful). I'm not bound to the exact ###'s but I felt that if there were inconsistencies in my posts with the ###'s than they would be pointed out and used to discredit my opinion.

If he is historically bad in 2014, then I will admit that I was wrong because I didn't predict that and by the same token if he is historically good, then I will admit that I am wrong because I didn't predict that ether.

EDIT: I never said that he should be part of a deadline trade. If a deal were to happen, then it would be in the offseason. A deadline deal I would disagree with.

I doubt anyone other than xxdamgoodxx would be surprised, in fact I would welcome it. Dempster on the other hand, I would trade him for a "B Prospect".

Hey, remember the last time the Red Sox traded a useful major league starting pitcher for a B prospect because they had enough pitching?

From the non-Red Sox MLB thread:

I would think that when the option is exercised, then the cap value is the AAV of the remaining years.  So if the Sox get close to the cap next year, they can exercise the option and lower their cap total by about $7M, right?  But if they are not close to the cap in 2014, then it's best to exercise the option only after 2014, when he is potentially a monster bargain. 

I wouldn't be surprised if someone gets traded away in the offseason. Between Workman, Webster, De la Rosa, Ranaudo, and Barnes, someone should be able to step up and pitch well, and all of them are blocked, and if we can improve other areas of the team while still having a good rotation then great. Dempster probably has the least valuable contract because it is market price, so the most movable assets are probably Lackey and Doubront. If we can use one of them as part of a deal that would bring us an upgrade at LF or 1b for example that would be great. It wouldn't be because you don't think he is good, just trading away something you have a lot of for something you need. That usually ends up being a good deal, economics 101. In any case who knows what pitchers will come or go in the next 32 hours and change the situation

When you look at how many different pitchers are actually used during any given season, it looks nothing at all like some fixed 5. This year has been no exception and its guaranteed that next year won't be either. Those question marks I added represent real risk for the remainder of this season and the next one. Lets see how many games each of those guys actually starts over that period.

Cherrington will be a popular man at the winter meetings. Im guessing one gets traded to fill a MLB hole. If we are going young at CF, SS and possible even 3B we might could use a vet in either LF or 1B. I like the idea of Workman being the 6th/swing man and getting some starts. Webster and Rubby close by in AAA working on their FB command.

Wily Mo Pena. I think he would have had a solid career had his agent not had a clause in his contract that he couldn't be sent to AAA. This was a guy who was rushed way too soon and he just got to be an undisciplined hacker. He was in desperate need of pitch recognition training. Pretty much the real life version of Pedro Cerrano. But the guy had about a 7-8 in power alone so I can't blame Theo for that trade as if it panned out the 3-5 of Manny Papi and Pena would have terrorized pitching.

That being said the rotation is locked in aside from a Lester or Dempster trade.

Lester
Peavy
Buchholz
Lackey
Dempster

Doubront once again becomes the long man and Workman solves the Sox need for a RHP MR for the season. The thing I love about Workman is that he's efficient and pitches above his stuff. Velocity isn't high, usually a guy who would look overmatched at this level. Kind of reminds me of a better version of Paxton Crawford in the way he pitches. Just my opinion though.

I'm so sick of Buchholz, please trade him this offseason.