SoxProspects News
|
|
|
|
Legal
Forum Ground Rules
The views expressed by the members of this Forum do not necessarily reflect the views of SoxProspects, LLC.
© 2003-2024 SoxProspects, LLC
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Home | Search | My Profile | Messages | Members | Help |
Welcome Guest. Please Login or Register.
Possible extension for Lester
|
Post by beasleyrockah on Apr 14, 2014 11:14:25 GMT -5
The biggest mistake the Lester is no Greinke crowd is making is the failure to realize that Lester is a number one pitcher in a championship team while Greinke is a number two on a division winner. I'd much rather have Lester on the sox than Greinke because Lester has done it. I'm stunned that people compare him to Sanchez and Garza. Do you think Sanchez or Garza could have what Lester did? Garza's a 2/3 on an excellent team and Sanchez is a 3.The sox have clearly decided to let him go. They made a silly offer. In the past, they've made these types of low ball offers to players who left. The only team that can do what the Red Sox are doing is the Yankees, and only because they usually pay the max, although they botched the Cano negotiations. There's no reason for Lester to sign with the Sox as free agency approaches. The market always goes up. Lester is going to MFY or the Cubs. Since Lackey won't play for $500k, he's an excellent trade candidate. Next year the rotation will likely be buccholz, ___________ (free agent), ____________ rookie pitcher, ______________ rookie pitcher, Doubront or Veteran bottom of rotation. Could be interesting to watch but certainly not a contender. My guess is the Sox are looking to turn over the pitching staff. The key question: are the minor league pitchers up to it. Owens likely is but the other probably aren't. The biggest mistake you're making is failing to realize if Lester had Kershaw on his team he'd be the #2 guy, and if he was in Detroit he'd be the #3. Having superior teammates doesn't make you any better or worse. As far as who has "done it", Beckett's "done it" twice while Kershaw has never "done it". Who would you prefer? I'm having a hard time respecting this argument, especially when your example (Garza) HAS out pitched Lester in an ALCS Game 7. Yes, Anibal Sanchez and Matt Garza are capable of a nice postseason run for a championship team, however no one player can carry a team to a WS win. Also, the guy you're discussing trading (Lackey) has "done it" twice too.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Apr 14, 2014 11:17:15 GMT -5
It's really difficult to peg Lester right now because his 2012 and 2013 were so different. Which season was the outlier? You can't just average them and say that's his starting point in a contract. After 2014, everyone should have a much better indication of which pitcher Lester is. Perhaps the Red Sox would be more comfortable seeing how he does in 2014 and giving him a bigger contract with more certainty than they are to give him a smaller contract with less certainty. Well, for one thing, his 2012 and his 2013 weren't all that different. Consider, for instance, that his xFIP was 3.90 in 2012 and 3.82 in 2013 and his SIERA was 4.01 in 2012 and 3.90 in 2013. He was better in 2013, but his strikeout, walk, and ground ball numbers weren't all that different. Moreover, this isn't a dichotomy where Lester is either his 2012 self or his 2013 self. He's almost certainly somewhere in between, and averaging those seasons gets us the most accurate projections going forward. This is exactly what happened with Ellsbury pre-2013. He had that crazy year in 2011, but the rest of his career has been much less impressive. His averaged triple-slash from 2007-2012 was .297/.349/.442. How did he perform in 2013? .298/.355/.426, which is pretty much exactly where the career averaging approach pegged him. That said, I agree that the front office absolutely wants to have as much information as possible before extending him, and that's the driving motivation for why their preseason offer was significantly lower than what even I (an admitted Lester skeptic) would have offered. It's a question of risk tolerance and negotiation strategy, and it does not mean that the front office is effectively "letting Lester walk." -------- As for the "Lester is a number one on a championship team" argument-- sorry, that's just not how I analyze baseball. By that logic, Doug Fister was a number four on a division winner and thus of pretty low value, but that would be selling him way short. I don't mean to suggest that Lester is only as good as Garza or Sanchez-- he's clearly much better, as durability is absolutely a skill that he's shown and they have not. But on a per-inning basis, they've been about as good, which means that Lester should get a contract closer to their level than Hamels/Greinke money. Bold prediction: Garza will outperform Lester in 2014 on at least one of the stats cited above (ERA-, FIP-, xFIP-).
|
|
|
Post by FenwayFanatic on Apr 14, 2014 11:25:06 GMT -5
I gotta agree with jmei on this one after taking a look at it.
In simple terms - yes we need an ace type pitcher in the coming years - but just because we sign Lester doesn't mean he'll be that guy.
The Sox could sign him to a 5-100M extension and he could revert to the lester that got hammered multiple times last year and in 2012. Letting him go may hurt in the short run but it will give us a pick and money to go get a guy the front office is more sure about. Lets face it - its hard to argue with Benny's track record so far. In fact, the 4 year 70 million dollar offer is starting to make a lot of sense.
Now this is purely speculation - But i can even forsee a scenario in which lester is dealt at the trade deadline. Unlikely, but Ben could get blown away by some GMs offers. Thats assuming we have a bad year but it is possible. There are A LOT of teams that could really use lester for a playoff push and could afford him as a rental player.
|
|
|
Post by mwgray13 on Apr 14, 2014 11:25:17 GMT -5
League and park adjustments to stats are useful, but not exact. How many times have we seen quality players come to the AL east and not be able to play upto the level. Its a lot easier for a pitcher to get into a rhythm when they pitch to pitcher opposed to a DH, the adjustments don't take into consideration the in inning stress, the additional pitches it requires you to throw, or the fact you have to face NYY, TB, BAL, and TOR 19 times each per season. Each of those points will alter the stats you listed, and than once you apply an across the board adjustments they don't fully conceptualize the pitcher.
Just a though, if you had the choice of facing the CWS, MIN, KC, and CLE or NYY, BAL, TB, and TOR 19 times each season, who do you choice? I go with the AL Central. Obviously 1 pitcher doesn't throw all those games but he pitches 15 of those based on a 5 man rotation. Their is no divisional adjustment in the numbers. In 2013, DET and BOS rotation very both very good, but I think they were closely matched, based on FIP and other stats they said they DET was much better. 10 WAR better in fact, I'm not buying 10 WAR.
Over the course of a 200 inning season, the difference between a 3.30 era and a 3.60 era is approximately 6 earned runs. That could be as simple as the wind blowing out in NYY, BOS or BAL stadiums or if you consider difficulty of the schedule, those runs add up quickly.
With the exception of Pedro, Lester is the best pitcher the Red Sox have had since the turn of the century. So anyone who calls Buchholz an Ace, know Lester is a notch above him. The Red Sox need to reasonably pay the best pitcher on the staff that just so happens to play in the 2nd best hitters park, in the toughest division in baseball, and in a park that is unfriendly to a LH pitcher. 120m/6 is the most I would go, and would hope for something like 100m/5.
|
|
|
Post by mwgray13 on Apr 14, 2014 11:34:47 GMT -5
If Lester doesn't have his 2-3 game mid season hiccup this year, he returns to form, and is the "ace" he was from 2008 thru 2011.
|
|
|
Post by jerrygarciaparra on Apr 14, 2014 11:40:38 GMT -5
Brett Anderson (27) - $12MM club option with a $1.5MM buyout
Josh Beckett (35)
Chad Billingsley (30) - $14MM club option with a $3MM buyout
Joe Blanton (34) - $8MM club option with a $1MM buyout
A.J. Burnett (38) - mutual option
Chris Capuano (36)
Bruce Chen (38) - $5.5MM mutual option with a $1MM buyout
Wei-Yin Chen (29) - $4.75MM club option with a $372K buyout
Kevin Correia (34)
Johnny Cueto (29) - $10MM club option with an $800K buyout
Jorge De La Rosa (34)
Ryan Dempster (38)
Gavin Floyd (32)
Yovani Gallardo (29) - $13MM club option with a $600K buyout
Jason Hammel (32)
J.A. Happ (32) - $6.7MM club option
Aaron Harang (37)
Dan Haren (34) - $10MM player option if 180 innings reached in 2014
Roberto Hernandez (34)
Luke Hochevar (31)
Hisashi Iwakuma (34) - $7MM club option with a $1MM buyout
Josh Johnson (31)
Kyle Kendrick (30)
Jon Lester (31)
Colby Lewis (35)
Paul Maholm (33)
Justin Masterson (30)
Brandon McCarthy (31)
Brandon Morrow (30) - $10MM club option with a $1MM buyout
Jeff Niemann (32)
Ross Ohlendorf (32)
Felipe Paulino (31) - $4MM club option with a $250K buyout
Jake Peavy (34)
Wandy Rodriguez (36)
Ervin Santana (32)
Joe Saunders (34)
Max Scherzer (30)
James Shields (33)
Carlos Villanueva (31)
Ryan Vogelsong (37)
Edinson Volquez (30)
If you believe that the RedSox have a wealth of prospects that have a shot at being starters in this league...I can't see how you wouldn't want to sign Lester for 6/120. Their presence alone should mitigate any concern for flexibility. The contract he is signing will be reflective of this major baseball market. I say again, I would easily pay that. Truthfully, if the only reason not to, it to maintain flexibility and not pay a penalty on salaries....that's BS. This isn't the DMZ of North Korea.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Apr 14, 2014 11:54:01 GMT -5
Re: mwgray13
I am sympathetic to the argument that park adjustments are one-size-fits-all and that the AL East often has strong offenses, but I think you're exaggerating their effects. The AL East is a tough place to pitch, but it's not like we're talking about the difference between the minors and the majors here. On a park-adjusted basis, the average wRC+ for the non-Red Sox AL East teams was 98 in 2013. That's not all that different from the AL Central (96.6) and actually trails the AL West (98.2).
You're also putting a lot of stock in subjective judgments (i.e., that he's the best pitcher since Pedro, he's an "ace," etc.) that should really not factor into their analysis that much. Those are just labels, and we should be far more concerned about how he performed on the field as of late.
|
|
|
Post by FenwayFanatic on Apr 14, 2014 12:08:19 GMT -5
League and park adjustments to stats are useful, but not exact. How many times have we seen quality players come to the AL east and not be able to play upto the level. Its a lot easier for a pitcher to get into a rhythm when they pitch to pitcher opposed to a DH, the adjustments don't take into consideration the in inning stress, the additional pitches it requires you to throw, or the fact you have to face NYY, TB, BAL, and TOR 19 times each per season. Each of those points will alter the stats you listed, and than once you apply an across the board adjustments they don't fully conceptualize the pitcher. Just a though, if you had the choice of facing the CWS, MIN, KC, and CLE or NYY, BAL, TB, and TOR 19 times each season, who do you choice? I go with the AL Central. Obviously 1 pitcher doesn't throw all those games but he pitches 15 of those based on a 5 man rotation. Their is no divisional adjustment in the numbers. In 2013, DET and BOS rotation very both very good, but I think they were closely matched, based on FIP and other stats they said they DET was much better. 10 WAR better in fact, I'm not buying 10 WAR. Over the course of a 200 inning season, the difference between a 3.30 era and a 3.60 era is approximately 6 earned runs. That could be as simple as the wind blowing out in NYY, BOS or BAL stadiums or if you consider difficulty of the schedule, those runs add up quickly. With the exception of Pedro, Lester is the best pitcher the Red Sox have had since the turn of the century. So anyone who calls Buchholz an Ace, know Lester is a notch above him. The Red Sox need to reasonably pay the best pitcher on the staff that just so happens to play in the 2nd best hitters park, in the toughest division in baseball, and in a park that is unfriendly to a LH pitcher. 120m/6 is the most I would go, and would hope for something like 100m/5. I partially agree with you. I mean we've seen guys like kyle lohse and aj burnett all but declared washed up in the al and then not only succeed in the Nl but flat out dominate. 2007 Beckett was also better than lester has ever been. 2013 Buchholz' stretch (when healthy) hasn't really been matched by lester ever either, so I think its a stretch to say best since Pedro. I trust the Sox FO to make the right decision on Lester. Ben knows what he's doing.
|
|
|
Post by oilcansman on Apr 14, 2014 12:22:00 GMT -5
A better way of making my argument is to say that Lester is more valuable to the Red Sox as a number one who has done it than Greinke is the to the Dodgers as a number 2 or Sanchez is to the Tigers as a number 3. The problem with jmei's reasoning is that even if he is correct, which I doubt, Garza and Sanchez aren't available. If Lester leaves, tell me what the Sox will do?
It's easy to claim Lester's not worth it. Give a realistic vision for building a championship rotation without lester over the next three years.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Apr 14, 2014 12:34:03 GMT -5
1) Pay more for Max Scherzer
2) Pay a similar amount for James Shields
3) Pay less for Justin Masterson
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Apr 14, 2014 12:48:01 GMT -5
1) Pay more for Max Scherzer 2) Pay a similar amount for James Shields 3) Pay less for Justin Masterson My prediction: No one will outbid the Yankees for Scherzer. If they miss the playoffs they will buy both Scherzer and Lester, luxury Tax be damned. If Yanks "settle" with Scherzer (they will need a shortstop and Assdribble Cabrera may be high on their list), I could also see Lester going to the Cubs for top dollar, among others. If the Sox don't sign him between now and the end of the exclusive post-season signing period, then they don't want him at the minimum dollars/years (or both) Lester is willing to settle for in his discount.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Apr 14, 2014 12:58:12 GMT -5
1) Pay more for Max Scherzer 2) Pay a similar amount for James Shields 3) Pay less for Justin Masterson or 4) Pay Lester a fair contract for both him and the Sox. I prefer #4. I'd rather not pay a similar amount for "Big Game" James Shields as Lester. Who knows how Shields would pitch as a hired gun under the microscope at Fenway? We know how Lester pitches. Justin Masterson is a lesser pitcher than Lester and will most likely continue to be. Max Scherzer, especially if he has a similar year to last season, will be up around the $30 million mark and we know the Sox aren't going there, although the Yankees probably would be willing to. Your statistical analysis is interesting but there are still three factors I look at. #1. Durability. Matt Garza might have a better rate stat here or there but he doesn't have Lester's durability. I'd take Lester any day over Garza except for whenever Game 7 of the 2008 ALCS occurred. #2. The stats don't factor in Lester's five final starts of the season which were crucial. Understandably post-season starts aren't part of the record, but it does matter. With a ton of pressure on him, he was lights out. You can debate whether Lester is an ace or not, but his post-season performance is not up for debate - he's pitched like an ace when it has mattered most. #3. Lester is somebody who can handle the pressure of playing for the Red Sox. Some guys handle it well. Some guys just don't. We know Lester can handle it. We don't know about somebody coming in as a hired gun. jmei, I don't think that anything you said wasn't inaccurate or unreasonable. I just prefer the devil I know to the one I don't know. Now if Lester is demanding a six year $140 deal, then yeah, I can see the Sox moving on, but I would think there's enough wiggle room and enough desire on both party's parts that I think it gets done. Otherwise I would think we'd hear Lester whining about the low-ball offer and the fact that he's been relatively positive about things makes me think that they'll figure things out.
|
|
|
Post by oilcansman on Apr 14, 2014 12:58:24 GMT -5
jmei:
1. Sox cannot seriously believe they are going to get Scherzer over Yanks or Detroit. That's really foolish planning. He's already turned down six years at 24 per. He's looking for Kershaw type money through at least age 36.
2. Shields turns 33 in December. He'll get 20 mill per. He'll get a minimum of 4 years, which means sox will pay a 36 year old Shields 20 million. Most likely he'll get a fifth year at age 37.
3. Masterson will be 30 at beginning next season. Seeking $17 Mill. per., which is pretty much what Sox offering lester now. Two years ago Masterson had era of 5.00. Last year was excellent but with numbers the same as Lester has posted every year of career except for one. This year off to slow start. Track record is not very impressive. Not in same league as Lester.
In summary, for Scherzer Sox will pay $27-$28 million through at least age 36 year, most likely into 37 or 38 year. Shields 20 million plus at minimum into age 36 year and likely longer. Masterson, who is a mid rotation guy, has a real chance at 17 million into his age 35 year, unless he just goes downhill this year in which case - yikes.
Why not give Lester, who has an excellent track record except for 1 season and is a known quantity $20 to $22 million for six years through is age 36 season. The three names you provided actually make a better case for Lester.
|
|
|
Post by FenwayFanatic on Apr 14, 2014 13:01:28 GMT -5
1) Pay more for Max Scherzer 2) Pay a similar amount for James Shields 3) Pay less for Justin Masterson My prediction: No one will outbid the Yankees for Scherzer. If they miss the playoffs they will buy both Scherzer and Lester, luxury Tax be damned. If Yanks "settle" with Scherzer (they will need a shortstop and Assdribble Cabrera may be high on their list), I could also see Lester going to the Cubs for top dollar, among others. If the Sox don't sign him between now and the end of the exclusive post-season signing period, then they don't want him at the minimum dollars/years (or both) Lester is willing to settle for in his discount. Even Yankee money has limits. With Arod's money coming back on the books, and all their infield holes, I don't think its likely the Yankees get both of them. I guess its possible though. I think Lester to the Cubs makes more sense. Although he would really have to hate winning to do that.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Apr 14, 2014 13:51:53 GMT -5
jmei: 1. Sox cannot seriously believe they are going to get Scherzer over Yanks or Detroit. That's really foolish planning. He's already turned down six years at 24 per. He's looking for Kershaw type money through at least age 36. 2. Shields turns 33 in December. He'll get 20 mill per. He'll get a minimum of 4 years, which means sox will pay a 36 year old Shields 20 million. Most likely he'll get a fifth year at age 37. 3. Masterson will be 30 at beginning next season. Seeking $17 Mill. per., which is pretty much what Sox offering lester now. Two years ago Masterson had era of 5.00. Last year was excellent but with numbers the same as Lester has posted every year of career except for one. This year off to slow start. Track record is not very impressive. Not in same league as Lester. In summary, for Scherzer Sox will pay $27-$28 million through at least age 36 year, most likely into 37 or 38 year. Shields 20 million plus at minimum into age 36 year and likely longer. Masterson, who is a mid rotation guy, has a real chance at 17 million into his age 35 year, unless he just goes downhill this year in which case - yikes. Why not give Lester, who has an excellent track record except for 1 season and is a known quantity $20 to $22 million for six years through is age 36 season. The three names you provided actually make a better case for Lester. Scherzer is more expensive, but he's also just much, much better. I'd probably rather give him 7/$175m (i.e., Tanaka money) than give Lester 6/$120. Shields is older, but he's also been better than Lester and will come on a shorter contract. Masterson has just been a little worse than Lester (entirely because of park adjustments) over the last three years, but they're the same age and Masterson will come much cheaper. At some level, I'd rather buy low on a curiously underrated guy like Masterson than buy high on Lester coming off an excellent postseason performance. My point is simple: the Red Sox have options. You might think they're inferior, but I hope you'll concede that they're reasonably comparable. If that's the case, then the front office is absolutely justified in thinking that there's no reason to lead extension negotiations with the highest price they're willing to pay, especially since they'd be extending him a year in advance. Hell, it even makes some sense to think that if they really thought Lester was worth 5/$100m, they'd still only offer 4/$70m a year in advance because of the risk premium involved with extending a pitcher early.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Apr 14, 2014 14:08:19 GMT -5
Well the Yankees can't sign everyone. They'll probably limit themselves to just 5 $20 million+ pitchers.
|
|
|
Post by oilcansman on Apr 14, 2014 14:11:15 GMT -5
jmei:
The sox low balled lester. They didn't even offer him adam wainwright money. Low balling by definition is an act of bad faith. It's a much better negotiation tactic to simply table things and not make an offer than to low ball. The years and yearly pay out are not close to market value.
The biggest mistake novices make in negotiating is assuming that a first offer is the beginning of a long grind to an agreement. When the market for players is well established, the correct move is to determine what is the lower and upper end of reasonable and offering the lower end at least. I think most would agree that a team friendly deal is 5 X $20 and a player friendly deal end is 6/7 X 25. Both are not acceptable but at least there's reasoning to each. 4 X 18 is a not business friendly message.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Apr 14, 2014 14:13:54 GMT -5
jmei: The sox low balled lester. They didn't even offer him adam wainwright money. Low balling by definition is an act of bad faith. It's a much better negotiation tactic to simply table things and not make an offer than to low ball. The years and yearly pay out are not close to market value. The biggest mistake novices make in negotiating is assuming that a first offer is the beginning of a long grind to an agreement. When the market for players is well established, the correct move is to determine what is the lower and upper end of reasonable and offering the lower end at least. I think most would agree that a team friendly deal is 5 X $20 and a player friendly deal end is 6/7 X 25. Both are not acceptable but at least there's reasoning to each. 4 X 18 is a not business friendly message. They probably don't want to extend him right now and probably said "here's what we're willing to do now, or else we can talk after the season". I'm sure there's a lot more discussion than handing a piece of scrap paper with 4/$70 million on it.
|
|
|
Post by beasleyrockah on Apr 14, 2014 14:15:34 GMT -5
I'd say 5/100 a year before free agency is about fair, and 6-7 at $25m per is absurd. That's overpaying even if he was a free agent, which he isn't yet.
Also, I figured after missing out on Cliff Lee and letting Robinson Cano walk this board would stop assuming every good free agent was destined to sign with the Yankees. I guess not. For the record, irrational fear should be placed on the Dodgers franchise at this time.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Apr 14, 2014 14:30:00 GMT -5
Another thing to consider is that there is absolutely no reason to extend him now without a significant discount separate of his stated home team discount. They would be taking on all of the risk for an injury or performance slide for the entire season needlessly. So "market value" shouldn't even be being discussed right now.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Apr 14, 2014 14:55:48 GMT -5
jmei: The sox low balled lester. They didn't even offer him adam wainwright money. Low balling by definition is an act of bad faith. It's a much better negotiation tactic to simply table things and not make an offer than to low ball. The years and yearly pay out are not close to market value. The biggest mistake novices make in negotiating is assuming that a first offer is the beginning of a long grind to an agreement. When the market for players is well established, the correct move is to determine what is the lower and upper end of reasonable and offering the lower end at least. I think most would agree that a team friendly deal is 5 X $20 and a player friendly deal end is 6/7 X 25. Both are not acceptable but at least there's reasoning to each. 4 X 18 is a not business friendly message. See, here's where we disagree. I think 5/$100m a year in advance is absolutely not team friendly for Lester, especially since they'd be giving it a year in advance. Here's how each pitcher performed in the three years before they hit free agency: Wainwright: 429 IP, 81 ERA-, 78 FIP-, 79 xFIP- (missed 2011 due to Tommy John surgery) Lester: 610.1 IP, 95 ERA-, 91 FIP-, 93 xFIP- Again: Lester checks the durability box, but he's also been between 13-14% worse than Wainwright, which puts him in a whole different class of player. Even factoring in inflation, 5/$100m is not team friendly, but rather market value. Like I said earlier and jimed reiterates above, teams generally don't offer market value early extensions because they would bear all the injury risk, and for any pitcher in their 30s, there is considerable injury risk ( one estimate pegs Lester's chances of going on the DL in 2014 at 37.5%; methodology described here). Plus, if 5/$100m is close to their reservation price (which I suspect it is), offering it in Spring Training may actually be disadvantageous. This basically happened with Scherzer-- the Tigers said "we offered you the most we can" and the agent says "not enough" and now negotiations are over and the player is guaranteed to be gone. I actually suspect the Red Sox never made a concrete offer of 4/$70m, but instead just suggested the Beckett extension (plus inflation) as a model, which the Levinsons rejected and subsequently leaked in an attempt to increase leverage. The way that Lester talks about it makes it seem like there was never a take-it-or-leave-it offer from either side, and negotiations will continue throughout the season. I'm actually pretty confident that the two sides will end up hammering out something like 5/$100m, and all this freaking out will have been for nothing.
|
|
|
Post by oilcansman on Apr 14, 2014 14:56:38 GMT -5
Another thing to consider is that there is absolutely no reason to extend him now without a significant discount separate of his stated home team discount. They would be taking on all of the risk for an injury or performance slide for the entire season needlessly. So "market value" shouldn't even be being discussed right now. This makes no sense. The reason to extend him is to avoid losing him to free agency or paying top the market price for him at the end of this year. He is willing to take less than full market value to hedge against the risk of downside performance or injury. This is pretty standard practice. Less than free agent market value shouldn't by all that significant when the player is 12 months away from free agency.
|
|
|
Post by oilcansman on Apr 14, 2014 15:14:42 GMT -5
jmei: Wainwright signed the deal in March, 2013. It's pretty much agreed upon in baseball circles that it was team friendly. hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/2014/01/18/adam-wainwright-has-no-regrets-about-signing-five-year-97-5-million-contract-extension/In 2011, he missed season with TJS. 2012 was a so so season for him as he had a 4.00 era and a .500 record. Then he signed long term. His situation was not comparable to Lester, as Lester is in a stronger spot both durability and performance wise during negotiations. In addition, as we saw this past year, the cost of upper end pitching rose. Therefor, offering Lester Wainwright money is the lower end of reasonable.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Apr 14, 2014 15:37:03 GMT -5
Another thing to consider is that there is absolutely no reason to extend him now without a significant discount separate of his stated home team discount. They would be taking on all of the risk for an injury or performance slide for the entire season needlessly. So "market value" shouldn't even be being discussed right now. This makes no sense. The reason to extend him is to avoid losing him to free agency or paying top the market price for him at the end of this year. He is willing to take less than full market value to hedge against the risk of downside performance or injury. This is pretty standard practice. Less than free agent market value shouldn't by all that significant when the player is 12 months away from free agency. For a 30 year old pitcher who is hard to label as either above average or top 10%? There should be a pretty big discount for the team to take on that risk. If he has a crappy enough year, he'll be lucky to get what the Sox offered him already. If he blows out his shoulder or elbow? Not happening at all. There is no reward to offering him 6/120 right now. Zero. We have exclusive rights with him following the season and if he is to be believed that he wants to stay, a fair offer at that time will be enough for him to stay. I bet the Red Sox would be far more willing to pay him more after the season than they would paying him slightly less than that today.
|
|
|
Post by mwgray13 on Apr 14, 2014 16:03:18 GMT -5
1) Pay more for Max Scherzer 2) Pay a similar amount for James Shields 3) Pay less for Justin Masterson I agree with most. Max has been better recently, so he will get a bit more. Shields should get same per year with fewer years, he is 33. I'm not sure Masterson gets Garza's 4 yr 50 m deal. Masterson, has had two good years as a starter, and 3 Avg or worst ones. Garza has always been average or better. Masterson is more comparable to Ervin Santana/Ubaldo Jimenez, in the sense he will either be great or awful this year. Additionally Buchholz 2013 numbers are not an apple to apple comparison. We are talking 16 starts which was influence by a streak, and if you believe in FIP, and other SABR stats you will see he was due for some regression. Lester had a similar streak as Buchholz did last yr, and if we highlight Doubront's quality start streak how does he compare. The best comparison for Lester is Andy Pettite, who is a borderline HOFer. That to me is an Ace. There are maybe 1 or 2 pitchers inducted in the HOF per year, which says you were elite for your career. Not saying Lester will be a HOFer, there are still a lot of variables. Lester has been as good or better than any Red Sox starter based on career performance as a Sox on a per start basis with the exception of Pedro (700 inn min) and Schilling (400 inn min) since 2000. The number state that very clearly. Once again my point is Fenway hurts our pitchers to the point where 1s look like 2s, and 2s look like 3s. OVER A 200 INNING SEASON the DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A 3.60 and a 3.30 ERA is 6 RUNS. The caps are very obnoxious but that is a very point and if you think the difference between the NL and AL east is 6 runs per season, Hamels = Lester.
|
|
|