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.
Jon Lester to the Cubs 6/155
|
Post by jimed14 on Dec 10, 2014 6:43:49 GMT -5
I think I hear Dan Shaugnassey writing up an article about how Lester wouldn't sign with the Red Sox because John Henry kicked his dog.
|
|
|
Post by redsox1534 on Dec 10, 2014 6:44:14 GMT -5
its really a tuff tuff loss. I think he got more then he is worth and that does make it easy to deal with. We arnt left with our you no what in our hands tho. We have Cespedes and he is a good player who may hold as much value and depending on who we get back for him we might end up sitting pretty.
|
|
|
Post by jerrygarciaparra on Dec 10, 2014 7:01:04 GMT -5
It never ceases to amaze the over-reactive nature of Sox fans. Those of you bitching and complaining need to put your emotions aside and get a reality check. I get that markets change, but NOONE was willing to go even as high as 6/135 a month ago and now all of a sudden, it's this FO is foolish for not going higher and sealing the deal. The whole "they should have signed him sooner" argument is foolish as well as its pure speculation that this was even possible. Lester didn't negotiate at all. That's more damning than an initial low offer. Stop placing blame and crying that now they are going to sell the farm. REALITY CHECK: Don't you think they already have a very good idea as to the trade costs of different pitchers? If they didn't panic and held ground with Lester why would they all of a sudden panic and trade X, Betts or Swithart for Hamels? I guess you can never say never, but the reactions are childish. And if they do end up with Hamels, he's better and more consistent than Lester so that is not a bad thing. I'd be more inclined to give people a break on this one. He was a favorite son of this team...sometimes people just need to be able to let it out. Otherwise..we'd all just be sabermetricians.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Dec 10, 2014 7:10:13 GMT -5
Maybe that's why the Redsox final offer too Lester was six years and $135MM because he pitch like crap in 2012 lol. Good bye too Blake Swihart and Henry Owens for Cole Hamels. Time for the Redsox too panic and save face. So you think the sox FO is stupid then? They do not make panic moves FFS I don't think the FO is stupid. It doesn't mean they don't make foolish moves. They were still low balling Jon Lester to the end. Why shouldn't they have gone 6 years $150 million on him? They really expected him to come back for $20 million less, especially after they low-ball offered him in March and dealt him away on July 31st? These athletes have egos, too and they remember everything they perceive as a slight and look for revenge. It's what motivates them. (Personally I was fine dealing him because it made all the sense in the world to do so. Just didn't care for the return.) Because a computer graphic spits out he's worth $21 million or something like that? They're perfectly willing to give Hanley Ramirez, a guy who's never played LF, has an injury history and attitude history, $22 million per year and they're fine giving a 280 lb 3b $19 million per year for 5 years, but they can't give Lester $25 million per year? Well because of that wise decision and that wise lowball offer they gave in March 2014, they are now in a situation where they have to scramble to get a replacement, actually two of the them. So now instead of spending an extra $30 - $40 million on Lester, they have to spend their money on a lesser pitcher like James Shields or they have to trade prospects like Owens or even worse, Swihart (or even worse Betts) on a Lester comparable pitcher. Does that make the Sox stupid? No, but it makes them foolish at times. And if I hear one more person squawk about Brandon McCarthy...that guy has an extensive injury history and only pitched well a couple seasons in Oakland and a half season in NY. Let's see if the Sox can dig themselves out of this without doing something they'll really regret, worse than overpaying Jon Lester, who got a contract that I think will look reasonable, when you compare it to what contracts will look like next year when the Zimmermans and Cuetos become free agents. Want shock value? See Max Scherzer's deal when Boras gets thru with things? Every year it's always the hand wringing and shock that free agent deals for the best talent is so expensive? That's the way the market works, like it or not. Why is it a surprise or a problem, especially for a big market team like the Sox? Nobody is saying throw the money away on anybody. I just think, given the annual value and years the Sox could be giving Hanley or Panda, giving Lester $25 million over 6 years wouldn't be ridiculous and have a vesting option for $20 million shouldn't have been ridiculous either. If he then chose the Cubs, then the Sox put their best foot forward and if they had offered 5 years $100 million dollars or so in mid March, maybe the Sox don't sign offer, but nobody would have thought they were lowballing him either. The Sox didn't do that. The Sox can probably afford to have two guys sitting atop of the rotation making in excess of $20 million, especially if they have kids like Rodriguez, Owens, and Barnes to take the last 3 spots. So now, the Sox aren't stupid, but they don't always help themselves. I know you're going to defend the Sox FO at all costs, because that's what you do. If the Sox get Lester and give him the money, then they're stepping up and they're great. If they lose Lester, well it was too much money anyways. Let's see if the Sox can make some astute moves forward. They're going to have to or they're going to lose a lot of high scoring games.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Dec 10, 2014 7:14:31 GMT -5
They offered him what they were willing to offer. The Cubs might have been willing to go up more and more and more. Criticism without being there is just complete guessing. For all anyone knows, maybe the Red Sox matched 3 offers and the Cubs then offered another $20 million and knew they were going higher if they matched again.
|
|
|
Post by GyIantosca on Dec 10, 2014 7:22:08 GMT -5
The Cubs need way more . Ben knew he was taking that. How can you leave 20 million on the table? I think Lester held out hoping the Sox would go up. They had a limit. Ben has a ton of assets. My dream would be Hamels and maybe like a Shields. But you can't deal with the Phillies.
I heard the Yankees asked about Jimmy Rollins to play SS and the Phillies want Severino back. LOL. He is the best prospect in the Yankees system for Rollins at his age. When I hear this there is no way you can deal with this crazy FO. The Phillies are hurting and still have not made any moves.
|
|
|
Post by Oregon Norm on Dec 10, 2014 7:22:37 GMT -5
...When NESN rating are down yes they will make dump moves like Carl Crawford. Now you have NESN rating down and there radio broadcast contract is up. They will sell the farm to be a playoff contender. That's rich, and quite funny, considering that it was Epstein who brought Crawford to Boston. A little bit of irony, there?
|
|
|
Post by curiousle on Dec 10, 2014 7:31:34 GMT -5
I agree, it's not the end of the world, players move on, they retire. The Cubs had to have Lester...had to have him. The Sox still have options, remember the loss of Tex?....I think they did the right thing. Although I don't know who is going to pay Max $200MM....that's just stupid money.
I expect the Sox to sign Masterson and Shields for 1 and 3 years respectively and see what Webster, De La Rosa and Owens can give them. and evaluate the trade market over the first 90 days of the season.
|
|
|
Post by Oregon Norm on Dec 10, 2014 7:41:22 GMT -5
I agree about Scherzer. I've been trying to figure out who might pay the guy an AAV of $30 million and I can't come up with any names. I know the paranoid set always see the Yankees lurking, but their boatload of big contracts for players now in serious decline has to have them gun shy. I think Boras is overplaying his hand, here.
|
|
|
Post by johnsilver52 on Dec 10, 2014 7:45:02 GMT -5
Don't think he went out and intended to set the market, along with kershaw earlier for SP, but now he, followed by Scherzer soon will be the new marker for what SP will go by.
Kind of odd is it not? Lester gave the Sox the team friendly deal earlier that was cost controlled and supposedly was willing to consider coming "home" for less. The guy is human. Cash is king. He set market value and am sure the Levinson brothers had a bug in his ear the entire process.
|
|
|
Post by moonstone2 on Dec 10, 2014 7:47:14 GMT -5
Do people really believe that these athletes are such babies that they consider things like a previous low offer or being traded? Baseball players are under a lot of pressure to take the highest offer and in most cases, that's what they do. You don't leave 40 mill on the table.
|
|
|
Post by cba82 on Dec 10, 2014 8:01:26 GMT -5
"I think Boras is overplaying his hand, here." -- I agree, Norm, and am hoping that that's the case. But, some team usually ends up bailing him out (as the Red Sox arguably did with Stephen Drew in 2014).
As for the Lester contract, I can't help but feel that, at the end of six years, the Cubs will have more regret than the Red Sox on this one, more for financial reasons than baseball ones.
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 10,888
|
Post by nomar on Dec 10, 2014 8:10:42 GMT -5
We'll be fine. If rather have a great lineup than great rotation anyway. Less volatile that way.
That being said we obviously need to improve our rotation still, but looking at what our buddies in Baltimore have done with their average rotation, I'm not worried that we can compete.
|
|
|
Post by brianthetaoist on Dec 10, 2014 8:10:52 GMT -5
Good for Lester ... congrats to him. We don't know what the vesting option looks like, but if it's reachable, it's actually more like a $40 million difference in offers. That's a lot of money, and Chicago's a cool city with a great ballpark. I would've made the same choice, probably. Well, actually I probably would've taken the money in SF because it's an awesome pitcher's park and a terrific city ... but I'm not gonna bash Lester for that choice!
Clearly, the Sox would've been better off offering 6/105 extension last winter, but that's hindsight. I'm fine with the way they handled this winter so far, although I'm guessing that they have plans B, C, and D roughly in mind already and hence know Lester's value to the team better than I do. Chicago's offer seems to rich to me. We'll see how it pans out, but I'm surely not gonna rip the Sox for trading Bogaerts, Betts, or Swihart or offering Scherzer $200 million dollars for the simple and I think important reason that none of those things have happened.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Dec 10, 2014 8:12:26 GMT -5
Do people really believe that these athletes are such babies that they consider things like a previous low offer or being traded? Baseball players are under a lot of pressure to take the highest offer and in most cases, that's what they do. You don't leave 40 mill on the table. Yes, and they are all on Twitter whining.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Dec 10, 2014 8:15:12 GMT -5
"I think Boras is overplaying his hand, here." -- I agree, Norm, and am hoping that that's the case. But, some team usually ends up bailing him out (as the Red Sox arguably did with Stephen Drew in 2014). Stephen Drew was the possible only exception. I think Boras could get $200 million for Scherzer if only one team wants him. He seems to be that good of a salesman. Look what he did with Fielder.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Dec 10, 2014 8:17:05 GMT -5
Good for Lester ... congrats to him. We don't know what the vesting option looks like, but if it's reachable, it's actually more like a $40 million difference in offers. That's a lot of money, and Chicago's a cool city with a great ballpark. I would've made the same choice, probably. Well, actually I probably would've taken the money in SF because it's an awesome pitcher's park and a terrific city ... but I'm not gonna bash Lester for that choice! Clearly, the Sox would've been better off offering 6/105 extension last winter, but that's hindsight. I'm fine with the way they handled this winter so far, although I'm guessing that they have plans B, C, and D roughly in mind already and hence know Lester's value to the team better than I do. Chicago's offer seems to rich to me. We'll see how it pans out, but I'm surely not gonna rip the Sox for trading Bogaerts, Betts, or Swihart or offering Scherzer $200 million dollars for the simple and I think important reason that none of those things have happened. The only way they would be better off is that people would quit thinking the "lowball" is the reason why he's not here. He's not here because he was always going to free agency and they were not willing to go up to $150 million.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Dec 10, 2014 8:23:25 GMT -5
Does anyone here truly believe that Hanley Ramirez is worth $22 million/year but Jon Lester isn't worth a dime more than the $22.5 million/year the Red Sox offered him? Yes. Steamer projects Hanley to be a 4 win player next year, Lester at 3.4, and while Hanley has more injury risk, at worst, they're still fairly comparable players. The Lester contract is also two more guaranteed years, which makes a huge difference when you're talking about a pitcher's age 35-6 seasons.
|
|
|
Post by buffs4444 on Dec 10, 2014 8:25:52 GMT -5
Congratulations to Jon and his family on a well deserved contract. As someone correctly noted above, he was a favorite son here and in my mind will always be beloved for the battles that he helped fight, and win, with this team. You'll be missed, brother.
The Cubs also get congrats. Theo & company are getting one hell of a pitcher, warrior, leader...the list goes on and on.
Good luck, and go kick some ass in the NL boys.
|
|
|
Post by brianthetaoist on Dec 10, 2014 8:26:17 GMT -5
Good for Lester ... congrats to him. We don't know what the vesting option looks like, but if it's reachable, it's actually more like a $40 million difference in offers. That's a lot of money, and Chicago's a cool city with a great ballpark. I would've made the same choice, probably. Well, actually I probably would've taken the money in SF because it's an awesome pitcher's park and a terrific city ... but I'm not gonna bash Lester for that choice! Clearly, the Sox would've been better off offering 6/105 extension last winter, but that's hindsight. I'm fine with the way they handled this winter so far, although I'm guessing that they have plans B, C, and D roughly in mind already and hence know Lester's value to the team better than I do. Chicago's offer seems to rich to me. We'll see how it pans out, but I'm surely not gonna rip the Sox for trading Bogaerts, Betts, or Swihart or offering Scherzer $200 million dollars for the simple and I think important reason that none of those things have happened. The only way they would be better off is that people would quit thinking the "lowball" is the reason why he's not here. He's not here because he was always going to free agency and they were not willing to go up to $150 million. Yeah, maybe ... but I think he would've signed that at that point because it would've been a great offer then. Whatever, either way it's arguing hypotheticals in hindsight, a doubly useless exercise. In the real-world of what's happening now, I think 6/132 was a good place to hold firm.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Dec 10, 2014 8:26:45 GMT -5
John Smoltz just said that Lester would likely have taken a lower salary and stayed in Boston had the team not traded him.
|
|
|
Post by freddysthefuture2003 on Dec 10, 2014 8:36:45 GMT -5
Goodbye Lester it's been nice Hope you find your paradise Tried to see your point of view Hope your dreams will all come true Goodbye Mookie, Goodbye Blake Will we ever meet again Feel no sorrow, feel no shame Come tomorrow, feel no pain
Hamels is definitely gonna be the next overreaction move.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Dec 10, 2014 8:46:01 GMT -5
Right before the trade deadline, amfox1 collected a list of the maximum amount that posters would be willing to offer Jon Lester in an extension. That list is here. Out of 34 responses, none of you went up to $155m or were willing to offer a vesting seventh year, only one of you (congrats, moonstone) was willing to go up to $150m, and only three of you were willing to go up to the $135m that the front office offered in the end. Now, I know that Lester has since put up another three months of excellent pitching after we collected those responses, and so it is reasonable to think that your price will have risen since then. But it certainly shouldn't have risen this much. As such, I think it's important to note that many of you who are now blasting the front office for not matching the Cubs' offer are on record as saying that you would have given Lester a maximum contract of 5/$110m-ish as recently as four months ago.
|
|
mobaz
Veteran
Posts: 2,795
Member is Online
|
Post by mobaz on Dec 10, 2014 8:50:39 GMT -5
I don't feel bad about this. Wish we had him, but I think the Sox made a very fair offer, that would not have made it hard for him to come back if he really wanted to. I think he made a very reasonable decision; being in the NL will probably extend his peak, he won 2 championships here and has the chance to go down as a legend in another city. There are few places as beautiful as Chicago in the summer.
I also tend to have an aversion to any of these deals where "everyone wants someone" and everything comes to a standstill waiting for it. Group think mentality tends not to be a good indicator of success.
Hammels for Not-Betts/Boegarts/Blake sounds good to me. Else let's see what Cueto or Zimmermann would take.
|
|
|
Post by sibbysisti on Dec 10, 2014 9:00:06 GMT -5
The front office now cannot say' "we lost Lester, but we stuck to our principles of not offering long term contracts to pitchers over 30".
|
|
|