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 thelavarnwayguy on May 9, 2014 11:28:42 GMT -5
On this whole "he's over 30 thing", I think LAckey's deal ends up worth it. And Schillings deal was worth it. Kuroda's deal has been worth it every year until this year for the last 6 years in a row. I think Lester's deal might end up decently also.
We've got some money. Who are they going to spend it on going forward if not guys like Lester. Mike Trout at $300 mil?
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on May 9, 2014 14:49:40 GMT -5
On this whole "he's over 30 thing", I think LAckey's deal ends up worth it. And Schillings deal was worth it. Kuroda's deal has been worth it every year until this year for the last 6 years in a row. I think Lester's deal might end up decently also. We've got some money. Who are they going to spend it on going forward if not guys like Lester. Mike Trout at $300 mil? John, Tom and Larry.
|
|
|
Post by burythehammer on May 9, 2014 15:32:39 GMT -5
We've got some money. Who are they going to spend it on going forward if not guys like Lester. Mike Trout at $300 mil? Are you saying if Mike Trout were available you would rather sign Jon Lester for 150 million than Mike Trout for 300 million.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on May 9, 2014 15:41:45 GMT -5
We've got some money. Who are they going to spend it on going forward if not guys like Lester. Mike Trout at $300 mil? Are you saying if Mike Trout were available you would rather sign Jon Lester for 150 million than Mike Trout for 300 million. I'm guessing it's more that he's not going to be available.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on May 9, 2014 15:44:18 GMT -5
This debate should really be tabled until the end of the season because there is literally no reason to sign him now in case of injury or sliding performance. It's not as if his price is going to skyrocket. It really can only go down.
The Sox probably would rather pay more if there were less risk involved which there would be in November than there is now.
|
|
|
Post by onbase on May 9, 2014 17:52:38 GMT -5
Lester is currently leading the league in Fangraphs WAR with 1.9. Scherzer is at 1.5. From 2008 through 2014, their Baseball-reference ERA+ is an identical 119.
There are lots of other numbers to look at, but the fact that those comprehensive numbers are so close makes me wonder about the comparative long term value. Scherzer may be more brilliant at times, but how will he adjust when he ages? Other options may cost less, but what are they going to produce? Can they save the bullpen when it needs saving? Can they face the best the AL has in the ALCS has and advance to the World Series? Lester is an ox, and if you lineup a bunch of good pitchers aged 29-31 and ask who's still going to able to take the ball every 5th day for a full season every year of his contract until he's 37, my money is on Jon Lester. I don't always like him, but I respect and value what he gives the team and I think they'd be insane to let him walk.
I'm sure somebody can find fault with the numbers and the logic above, but I have yet to be convinced any other option holds as much value as signing Lester. If they'd offered $120M over 6 years, I think he'd be under contract now and I'm still annoyed at that lowball offer.
|
|
|
Post by thelavarnwayguy on May 9, 2014 19:52:45 GMT -5
We've got some money. Who are they going to spend it on going forward if not guys like Lester. Mike Trout at $300 mil? Are you saying if Mike Trout were available you would rather sign Jon Lester for 150 million than Mike Trout for 300 million. I'm essentially saying there is a limited number of top FA who are going to become available, even if Trout were to end up becoming available at some point, and the top talents are all going to cost a lot of moolah. I'm curious, I mean really curious, as to what their planning really is. I would think they will target at least some top FA. Which ones will they pull the trigger on? Will they be value shoppers to a fault at some point? That sounds like a bad way to say it but will they ever pull the trigger on a top guy again, given what they have said recently? They got Pedroia to a team friendly deal. They seem to have at least tried to pass on just about everyone else since. I'm not even certain they really wanted Napoli back all that much.
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on May 12, 2014 9:19:41 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by jerrygarciaparra on May 12, 2014 11:27:36 GMT -5
The shiny new toys could just be 4A guys or relievers. The 6/$120mil ship has sailed. Short of an arm injury...which noone wants....we may as well get used to a bigger bump.
I can see the Yankees throwing big bucks at him...and it hurts.
|
|
|
Post by FenwayFanatic on May 12, 2014 12:06:23 GMT -5
Who is it more likely the Yanks go for, Scherzer or Lester? And then there is Shields as well. Is Masterson worth a draft pick? Where do these four end up? The Dodgers are also in the mix.
How do we replace Lester? So many questions but right now it looks more likely than not he is gone.
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on May 12, 2014 14:01:22 GMT -5
Who is it more likely the Yanks go for, Scherzer or Lester? And then there is Shields as well. Is Masterson worth a draft pick? Where do these four end up? The Dodgers are also in the mix. How do we replace Lester? So many questions but right now it looks more likely than not he is gone. They are the Yankees. If they miss the playoffs again it be both, plus a SS. But even if they don't buy both, Texas, LAA, Sea, Cubs even Phils, all have $$$$ to spend. Sox have money, too. I understand their reticence to spend it on pitchers over 30 but what they reportedly opened with really sent an odd message to a guy who said he'd be willing to take a bit of a discount to stay. If they only want to go 4 years they may have to jack up the AAV. And with this market, Lester is prob looking at $22M-$24M a year AAV (or more) on the open market on a 5-7 year deal as it is. I also don't see any one out there ready to make a Pedro-type deal with the Sox (MIA trading Jose Fernandez?? Why would they ever do that while he's still cheap? Samardzija's nice but he's not a #1 and maybe not even a number 2 starter- and if the Cubs won't extend him and they have cash, not a particularly good sign). You can dream on Webster/De La Rosa/Barnes et all - but history says they will all be #3 starters at best - if that - and it will be a few years yet until any of them reach that ceiling. So yes, this will be interesting to watch. I fear the worst.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on May 12, 2014 14:17:25 GMT -5
Lester isn't upset though, not like Scherzer. I'm sure the Sox told him they'd offer him more after the season with one less season of injury risk on the table. The only way the Sox were going to extend him in March a full season ahead of time is if he did take a lowball offer like 4/$70.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on May 29, 2014 9:47:52 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on May 29, 2014 10:29:10 GMT -5
I have no idea what their plan is for pitching next year, unless this front office is delusional enough to think that any of Barnes, Ranaudo, Owens, Webster or De La Rosa will be any more than a #3 starter, and even if they do think so, none of them approaches that next year. You'll also have Lackey, who has been good, in further decline, and the great unknowns of Buchholz and Doubront.
If Lester doesn't figure into it and they're "philosophically opposed to long term deals" are we looking at 2-4 more bridge years til they finally get a clue? There is no #1 starter in this system - or at least none who will reach MLB within the next 3 years, and likely not even an legit #2. Lester will decline over a 5 year deal, but given all we know, if he is not extended, does anyone see a discernible plan here?
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on May 29, 2014 10:34:03 GMT -5
I really have no hesitation in thinking that this deal gets done.
My guess is 4/$100m with a 5th year vesting option. This goes with the pay more for less years philosophy.
I also expect that Lackey's $500k contract next year gets torn up and they re-sign him for something like 3/$36m or 3/$30m.
|
|
|
Post by jdb on May 29, 2014 10:52:58 GMT -5
I think this gets done as well. Also isn't there a Japanese pitcher coming over we are scouting pretty heavily?
|
|
|
Post by jmei on May 29, 2014 11:45:48 GMT -5
I have no idea what their plan is for pitching next year, unless this front office is delusional enough to think that any of Barnes, Ranaudo, Owens, Webster or De La Rosa will be any more than a #3 starter, and even if they do think so, none of them approaches that next year. You'll also have Lackey, who has been good, in further decline, and the great unknowns of Buchholz and Doubront. If Lester doesn't figure into it and they're "philosophically opposed to long term deals" are we looking at 2-4 more bridge years til they finally get a clue? There is no #1 starter in this system - or at least none who will reach MLB within the next 3 years, and likely not even an legit #2. Lester will decline over a 5 year deal, but given all we know, if he is not extended, does anyone see a discernible plan here? You need to give the front office more credit. For one thing, you're exaggerating this front office's aversion to long-term deals. They recently extended Pedroia through his age-38 season and Ortiz through his age-40 season (with a very reachable vesting option for his age-41 season and a club option for his age-42 season), even though neither had reached free agency. This ownership group and front office certainly prefer not to sign players to long-term deals that extend through their decline years, but it has never been a categorical opposition. They've stated again and again that they're willing to give a long-term deal to the right player, and by all indications, Jon Lester falls in their category of the right player. I'm willing to bet they end up agreeing to something in the five year, nine-figure range before the start of free agency. Don't let the opening offer fool you, though there's no need to delve into that again (see the last three or so pages of this thread). Even if they don't re-sign Lester, this starting pitching class is pretty stacked, and there are only so many big-market teams out there willing to sign them. If Lester leaves, they could very well grab, say, Shields for 4/$90m or Masterson for 5/$80m and be pretty well-off. It's also a deep class, with enough solid mid-rotation-guys-with-upside out there (Santana, De La Rosa, Liriano, McCarthy, etc.) that they can definitely at least fill Lester's spot with an above-average pitcher. I also think this idea of "you need an ace to be successful (in the playoffs)" is overstated. Yes, you want the best players possible, but a deep rotation of above-average-but-not-elite arms can still be pretty effective. Not saying that the Pawtucket guys are necessarily going to fall into that class, but they all have the ceilings to do so, and only one or two of them needs to take a small step forward to fill out a solid rotation.
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on May 29, 2014 14:43:46 GMT -5
Confidence of re-signing Lester negates the premise I was suggesting - what's the plan if they don't but OK, I'll play along. Ortiz is a two year deal with an option - that's not long term just because he is old. Pedroia is an extremely team-friendly deal, so, yes, let me rephrase:
This team currently appears to be adverse to market value deals longer than 3 years for top players.
Masterson is a pending disaster with declining velocity - stay away. And I believe Santana, De La Rosa, Liriano, McCarthy are all sub #3 starters at this point (and match-ups say beware McCarthy in the AL East, as much as I like him). I think in this market Scherzer gets 7 years, Lester can get 6 at $20+M a year, and despite his age I bet Shields gets at least 4 at $18+M a year.
I don't believe you can go far in the playoffs with a staff of #3s or less without a withering offensive attack, and even then, let's remember the adage about pitching and defense. And this team has money as one of it's defining assets, along with a good farm. I am personally on the fence about giving Lester more than 4 years but I don't see a clear path if they are not in hard for Scherzer (who has never even thrown a complete game) or can somehow swing a trade for Yu Darvish or Madison Bumgarner (not happening), King Felix (highly doubtful), or Cliff Lee (maybe doable but that arm is going to shatter someday) or Samardijiza (I think he's not as good as his numbers; essentially a #3 sans recent history, or go get an elite bat (even less of a chance).
Mellen, Hatfield, Badler and others project all the Sox AA/AAA staters as #3s at best. They won't start out there, either. Those are ceilings. Sure, one guy could out do his projections but that's nothing to bank on. Meanwhile, if no Lester, you'll have two (Peavy & Lester) and potentially 3 open spots (Doubront or Buchholz) to fill. Right now 3 of those guys have been pitching like #5s or less.
I'm sure the front office has a plan, I am just not seeing evidence of it right now.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on May 29, 2014 15:54:24 GMT -5
Confidence of re-signing Lester negates the premise I was suggesting - what's the plan if they don't but OK, I'll play along. Ortiz is a two year deal with an option - that's not long term just because he is old. Pedroia is an extremely team-friendly deal, so, yes, let me rephrase: This team currently appears to be adverse to market value deals longer than 3 years for top players.Right, and I disagree with that premise. A few more specific responses: -Pedroia's deal was not that below-market. The total new guaranteed money ($89m over five years starting in his age-33 season) is not much less than what he'd get on the free agent market, especially when you take into account the performance risk the front office is taking on by signing the deal two years before he becomes a free agent. -This statement is based off a sample size of two offseasons and some highly-qualified public statements. They will have something like $70m to spend this offseason, and I'm willing to bet a significant portion of that is spent on either Lester or an alternative top-end pitcher (see below). They're also definitely going to spend up to the luxury tax limit (if not over it), and it's hard to see a way to do that without at least one longer-term deal. -Lester had stated multiple times that he's willing to take a hometown discount, which, by definition, suggests that he'd take a below-market deal. Now, that's contingent on his definition of below-market matching with the Red Sox definition, but I'm willing to bet that there's some room for convergence there. The Levinsons are not hard-line market-setters like Boras, and the set of comps (Wainwright, etc.) are pretty easily defined. Again, I'm willing to bet that they agree to something like 5/$110m by November. Masterson is a pending disaster with declining velocity - stay away. And I believe Santana, De La Rosa, Liriano, McCarthy are all sub #3 starters at this point (and match-ups say beware McCarthy in the AL East, as much as I like him). I think in this market Scherzer gets 7 years, Lester can get 6 at $20+M a year, and despite his age I bet Shields gets at least 4 at $18+M a year. I don't believe you can go far in the playoffs with a staff of #3s or less without a withering offensive attack, and even then, let's remember the adage about pitching and defense. And this team has money as one of it's defining assets, along with a good farm. I am personally on the fence about giving Lester more than 4 years but I don't see a clear path if they are not in hard for Scherzer (who has never even thrown a complete game) or can somehow swing a trade for Yu Darvish or Madison Bumgarner (not happening), King Felix (highly doubtful), or Cliff Lee (maybe doable but that arm is going to shatter someday) or Samardijiza (I think he's not as good as his numbers; essentially a #3 sans recent history, or go get an elite bat (even less of a chance). Mellen, Hatfield, Badler and others project all the Sox AA/AAA staters as #3s at best. They won't start out there, either. Those are ceilings. Sure, one guy could out do his projections but that's nothing to bank on. Meanwhile, if no Lester, you'll have two (Peavy & Lester) and potentially 3 open spots (Doubront or Buchholz) to fill. Right now 3 of those guys have been pitching like #5s or less. I'm sure the front office has a plan, I am just not seeing evidence of it right now. Shields has outperformed Lester over the past few years, and I'd take him at 4/$75m in a heartbeat (it's going to be closer to 4/$90m, which I would be happy to do if Lester's not there.). Lee might be available via trade (though with Amaro, who knows), and he's been almost as good as any pitcher in the league over the past few years. Scherzer's the best free agent pitcher since Greinke (and might be better than Greinke was), and while he's going to cost a lot, there's at least a chance that the game of musical chairs ends up with him signing with the Red Sox. Those are the high-end contingency plans, and I would pursue them in that order (Shields > Lee > Scherzer). I'd wager that there's a pretty good chance that even if Lester falls through, one of the above options is available, and any of them would fill that "#1" spot in the rotation just as well as Lester. While the other pitchers in this class form a separate tier in terms of performance, they're going to come a lot cheaper, and that saved money can be reinvested elsewhere (say, signing two mid-tier starters or buying low on Chase Headley). The difference between Lester and, say, Masterson is a couple wins at most, and you can make that up elsewhere. Having an elite starter is not a prerequisite to playoff success-- there's no secret sauce, you just need a good team and a lot of luck. If they grab a couple mid-tier starters and pair them with Lackey, one of Buchholz/Doubront shakes themselves out of it, and one of the young starters emerges, you see the beginnings of an above-average rotation, even if it's one with a higher risk profile than I'd prefer. Between five MLB-ready starting pitchers in Pawtucket with projections somewhere between mid-rotation starter and back-end guy, I'm willing to bet at least one or two of them emerges to become average-to-above-average starters next year (my money is on De La Rosa and Workman), and that's all that they'd really need. I feel like we're talking in circles here, but my main point is that it is not a forgone conclusion that Lester is gone in free agency, but even if he is, there are multiple backup options available. You might not like them, but I think they'd be acceptable, if not ideal. Frankly, I'm much more worried about what happens if Christian Vazquez can't hit enough to be the starting catcher next year...
|
|
|
Post by nexus on May 29, 2014 16:12:33 GMT -5
Confidence of re-signing Lester negates the premise I was suggesting - what's the plan if they don't but OK, I'll play along. Ortiz is a two year deal with an option - that's not long term just because he is old. Pedroia is an extremely team-friendly deal, so, yes, let me rephrase: This team currently appears to be adverse to market value deals longer than 3 years for top players. Masterson is a pending disaster with declining velocity - stay away. And I believe Santana, De La Rosa, Liriano, McCarthy are all sub #3 starters at this point (and match-ups say beware McCarthy in the AL East, as much as I like him). I think in this market Scherzer gets 7 years, Lester can get 6 at $20+M a year, and despite his age I bet Shields gets at least 4 at $18+M a year. I don't believe you can go far in the playoffs with a staff of #3s or less without a withering offensive attack, and even then, let's remember the adage about pitching and defense. And this team has money as one of it's defining assets, along with a good farm. I am personally on the fence about giving Lester more than 4 years but I don't see a clear path if they are not in hard for Scherzer (who has never even thrown a complete game) or can somehow swing a trade for Yu Darvish or Madison Bumgarner (not happening), King Felix (highly doubtful), or Cliff Lee (maybe doable but that arm is going to shatter someday) or Samardijiza (I think he's not as good as his numbers; essentially a #3 sans recent history, or go get an elite bat (even less of a chance). Mellen, Hatfield, Badler and others project all the Sox AA/AAA staters as #3s at best. They won't start out there, either. Those are ceilings. Sure, one guy could out do his projections but that's nothing to bank on. Meanwhile, if no Lester, you'll have two (Peavy & Lester) and potentially 3 open spots (Doubront or Buchholz) to fill. Right now 3 of those guys have been pitching like #5s or less. I'm sure the front office has a plan, I am just not seeing evidence of it right now. I'm sure they do too. Most smart orgs have plans. And even though they're probably not overly concerned about executing and completing their 2015 plan in May 2014, I doubt they are comfortable with a Lackey, Buchholz, Doubront, Ranaudo, Webster staff next season. So relax for a second and enjoy the .400 ball they're playing right now.
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on May 29, 2014 20:01:05 GMT -5
Masterson is a pending disaster with declining velocity - stay away. And I believe Santana, De La Rosa, Liriano, McCarthy are all sub #3 starters at this point (and match-ups say beware McCarthy in the AL East, as much as I like him). I think in this market Scherzer gets 7 years, Lester can get 6 at $20+M a year, and despite his age I bet Shields gets at least 4 at $18+M a year. I'm sure the front office has a plan, I am just not seeing evidence of it right now. Shields has outperformed Lester over the past few years, and I'd take him at 4/$75m in a heartbeat (it's going to be closer to 4/$90m, which I would be happy to do if Lester's not there.). Lee might be available via trade (though with Amaro, who knows), and he's been almost as good as any pitcher in the league over the past few years. Scherzer's the best free agent pitcher since Greinke (and might be better than Greinke was), and while he's going to cost a lot, there's at least a chance that the game of musical chairs ends up with him signing with the Red Sox. Those are the high-end contingency plans, and I would pursue them in that order ( Shields > Lee > Scherzer). I'd wager that there's a pretty good chance that even if Lester falls through, one of the above options is available, and any of them would fill that "#1" spot in the rotation just as well as Lester. While the other pitchers in this class form a separate tier in terms of performance, they're going to come a lot cheaper, and that saved money can be reinvested elsewhere (say, signing two mid-tier starters or buying low on Chase Headley). The difference between Lester and, say, Masterson is a couple wins at most, and you can make that up elsewhere. Having an elite starter is not a prerequisite to playoff success-- there's no secret sauce, you just need a good team and a lot of luck. If they grab a couple mid-tier starters and pair them with Lackey, one of Buchholz/Doubront shakes themselves out of it, and one of the young starters emerges, you see the beginnings of an above-average rotation, even if it's one with a higher risk profile than I'd prefer. Between five MLB-ready starting pitchers in Pawtucket with projections somewhere between mid-rotation starter and back-end guy, I'm willing to bet at least one or two of them emerges to become average-to-above-average starters next year (my money is on De La Rosa and Workman), and that's all that they'd really need. I feel like we're talking in circles here, but my main point is that it is not a forgone conclusion that Lester is gone in free agency, but even if he is, there are multiple backup options available. You might not like them, but I think they'd be acceptable, if not ideal. Frankly, I'm much more worried about what happens if Christian Vazquez can't hit enough to be the starting catcher next year... [/quote] I would do that. I was all for the Sox going full on for Greike and would be up for 6 years of Scherzer, but Boras will get teams to bid that up to silly money. Shields for 4 would be fine but some moron may offer 5.
As for catcher, if Vazquez isn't ready you're probably looking at a platoon of Butler and Suzuki barring a trade.
|
|
|
Post by raftsox on May 30, 2014 10:16:42 GMT -5
you just need a good team and a lot of luck. If they grab a couple mid-tier starters and pair them with Lackey, one of Buchholz/Doubront shakes themselves out of it, and one of the young starters emerges, you see the beginnings of an above-average rotation, even if it's one with a higher risk profile than I'd prefer. Between five MLB-ready starting pitchers in Pawtucket with projections somewhere between mid-rotation starter and back-end guy, I'm willing to bet at least one or two of them emerges to become average-to-above-average starters next year (my money is on De La Rosa and Workman), and that's all that they'd really need. I feel like we're talking in circles here, but my main point is that it is not a forgone conclusion that Lester is gone in free agency, but even if he is, there are multiple backup options available. You might not like them, but I think they'd be acceptable, if not ideal. Frankly, I'm much more worried about what happens if Christian Vazquez can't hit enough to be the starting catcher next year... I'm thinking Lester is a 6/120M signing. I don't disagree with your logic, but Fangraphs does a "crowd sourcing" project every year and consistently the crowd (ie. us) is low by one season per "star" player.
|
|
|
Post by oilcansman on May 30, 2014 10:41:12 GMT -5
No way Scherzer is coming to Sox, as he's already rejected $144 million offer from Detroit. Masterson is pitching horrible and currently is one of the worst startes in the AL. Lester's numbers are very good and he's just sailing nicely through this season. He is terrific at pitching under pressure, whether it the playoffs of his final year before free agency. As for James Shields "outperforming" Lester, he has pitched his entire career in baseball wastelands. Zero pressure. In addition, Shields is 2 years older and has 300 more innings on his arm than Lester. Finally, Lester is a lefty, which all things being equal, is more desirable.
Lester has, for the most part, excelled in baseball's most intense environment and led his team to a world series. Stats obviously are useful, but the primary problem is they sometimes illuminate the trees but miss the forest.
Scherzer ends up with Yankees. Lester likely goes to Detroit. Shields likely signs with Red Sox for same terms Lester would have accepted in March. Sox will panic, and give in to Shields' agent. I hope I'm wrong. I love Lester.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on May 30, 2014 10:45:41 GMT -5
As for James Shields "outperforming" Lester, he has pitched his entire career in baseball wastelands. Zero pressure. Counterpoint: his nickname is literally "Big Game James."
|
|
|
Post by johnsilver52 on May 30, 2014 14:49:36 GMT -5
As for James Shields "outperforming" Lester, he has pitched his entire career in baseball wastelands. Zero pressure. Counterpoint: his nickname is literally "Big Game James." I wouldn't mind having Shields on most teams at all, but still have bad memories of earlier in his career when Shields was awful at Fenways and Maddon would try to skip his turn at Fenway. What if his issues were to return after signing a large contract and late in his career at that for roughly half of his starts? Lester, for roughly 5/100m would be a decent sign, but as you have suggested, it's possibly not going to happen until after Jon tests the market and sees what his worth actually is and weighs it with returning to his comfort level, as well with how this team looks after the season. If some team offers him possibly 130-140m and he likes the team a lot, he could leave, but maybe not some team that looks like a perenial loser is my guess that wants him as a show piece. Have an idea on Lackey also to keep him more focused, even if probably isn't needed. Give him 2 1y extensions on top of 2015 based on starts at his 15m level. Both escalators. Start at 15 and every 5, up until 30 he gets a "raise" until he hits 15m.
|
|
|