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.
|
Post by patrmac04 on Jan 3, 2014 23:05:20 GMT -5
The last time the Sox had a surplus of starting pitchers they wound up with Wily Mo Pena. Injuries and that trade left them grasping for straws. It may be different his time, though. I cannot remember a time when the organization was so rich with pitching prospects, particularly starters. One of Workman, Ranaudo and Webster, most likely Workman, will find an opportunity to move into the rotation. Dempster appears the most likely candidate to move, though Lackey and Peavey would generate a far better return. Peavy is six years younger, has won a Cy Young and is and has always been a much better pitcher than Dempster. The major problem with Peavy is that he is legally blind and it is his vision that is failing him from a medical issue and not his pitching ability. That said, he is a player you can make a QO to and get a draft pick from because he is a darn good pitcher and relatively young after next season. Dempster will not get you a draft pick if you go through the year with him because he is old and is most definitely the most likely candidate if they do move a starter. I think the Sox would be wise to head into spring training and assess health before anything. If all the starters from last year are indeed healthy and looking good, then move Dempster. That Wily Mo Pena trade still leaves a sour taste in my mouth because Wily Mo was such a flop. On top of Wily Mo's flop, I always felt like the Sox pulled a dirty move on Bronsen Arroyo trading him immediately after he gave the Sox a hometown discount for three years at under 12 mil. I am hesitant to trade away starting pitching depth after that season. That year we had Curt Schilling, Tim Wakefield, Josh Beckett, Matt Clement, David Wells and Jonathan Papelbon as starters to start the season. We ended the season with three starts over 100 innings and only two starters over 200 innings in Beckett & Shilling with Josh having an ERA of 5.01. Wake was only able to give 140 innings and Tavarez was the 4th highest in team innings (the season he rolled the ball to first and Manny petted his head). Clement had a 6.61 ERA in only 65.1 innings, Wells 4.98 in 47 innings and Papelbon never started. To top it all off Jon Lester got diagnosed with cancer and we all know how sad we were on that day for him. I am proud to have that guy still here with us... but at the time it killed our chances and overall moral of the team. Can I tell you how depressing it was as a season ticket holder to have the best thing be Devern Hansack's five inning rain shortened no hitter as being the highlight of the last two weeks of the season? There is a difference between this upcoming season and 2006 however. The next man standing after we traded away Arroyo and medical issues were Kyle Snyder, David Pauley, Kason Gabbard, Kevin Jarvis, Lenny Dinardo and Jason Johnson. This year we have some lottery tickets in the pipeline.
|
|
jimoh
Veteran
Posts: 3,981
|
Post by jimoh on Jan 4, 2014 6:56:53 GMT -5
The last time the Sox had a surplus of starting pitchers they wound up with Wily Mo Pena. Injuries and that trade left them grasping for straws. It may be different his time, though. I cannot remember a time when the organization was so rich with pitching prospects, particularly starters. One of Workman, Ranaudo and Webster, most likely Workman, will find an opportunity to move into the rotation. Dempster appears the most likely candidate to move, though Lackey and Peavey would generate a far better return. Peavy is six years younger, has won a Cy Young and is and has always been a much better pitcher than Dempster. The major problem with Peavy is that he is legally blind and it is his vision that is failing him from a medical issue and not his pitching ability. .. What? Have you read something suggesting that Peavy's eyesight is worsening, or hurts his pitching? Hasn't he been this way his whole life, including his Cy Young year? He's legally blind without glasses, but he wears glasses. He still has poor eyesight with glasses, but he gets by. Can you cite a source that says his eyesight has become more of a problem?
|
|
john
New Member
Posts: 1
|
Post by john on Jan 5, 2014 16:47:04 GMT -5
IIRC, the $500k option is voided if Lackey is traded. Therefore, he is worth a lot more to the Sox than to anyone else. He's likely going nowhere. I believe we looked into this and decided it was false. There have been no confirmed reports that Lackey's option voids if traded-- just an MLBTR link to a tweet that was subsequently deleted. Lackey does gain 10-and-5 rights (the right to veto any trade) after the 2014 season, though. Thing is though, what's stopping him from simply retiring? 2015 will be his age 36 season and he's made $90mm over his career. He's also won the WS twice now. What incentive would there be for him to play for $500k?
|
|
|
Post by chavopepe2 on Jan 5, 2014 16:53:06 GMT -5
I believe we looked into this and decided it was false. There have been no confirmed reports that Lackey's option voids if traded-- just an MLBTR link to a tweet that was subsequently deleted. Lackey does gain 10-and-5 rights (the right to veto any trade) after the 2014 season, though. Thing is though, what's stopping him from simply retiring? 2015 will be his age 36 season and he's made $90mm over his career. He's also won the WS twice now. What incentive would there be for him to play for $500k? Lackey? Is that you? How often do we hear players retire because they aren't going to make enough money? Players almost always keep playing as long as they can physically be successful. We see players end their careers making a lot less money than they did in their prime all the time. If Lackey is still pitching at a high level, I doubt he retires because he's upset with his contract. He'll pitch out the year in hopes of continuing his career.
|
|
|
Post by wcsoxfan on Jan 5, 2014 16:56:57 GMT -5
Thing is though, what's stopping him from simply retiring? 2015 will be his age 36 season and he's made $90mm over his career. He's also won the WS twice now. What incentive would there be for him to play for $500k? That's a good point - A lot of this depends on how many more years Lackey wants to play for. Some guys want to pitch until their arm falls off. Perhaps this is part of the consideration for the Red Sox not picking up his option at this point. Maybe they will offer him something like a 2yr/18mil contract at the end of the season to incentivize him into coming back. Welcome to the forums btw.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Jan 5, 2014 17:18:29 GMT -5
Thing is though, what's stopping him from simply retiring? 2015 will be his age 36 season and he's made $90mm over his career. He's also won the WS twice now. What incentive would there be for him to play for $500k? Lackey? Is that you? How often do we hear players retire because they aren't going to make enough money? Players almost always keep playing as long as they can physically be successful. We see players end their careers making a lot less money than they did in their prime all the time. If Lackey is still pitching at a high level, I doubt he retires because he's upset with his contract. He'll pitch out the year in hopes of continuing his career. Literally never. Can anyone think of even a single example? I can't. Roy Oswalt, kinda sorta maybe? Even if Lackey's only motivation was money, it would be incredibly short-sighted of him to retire because he has to pitch one year at the minimum. If he's even league-average that year, he's going to get another big contract in free agency. Bartolo Colon just signed for 2/20 and he's 57 years old and shaped like a perfect cube. Or in other words, if you're a pitcher and your goal is to make a bunch of money, it is decidedly in your best interest to keep pitching.
|
|
|
Post by moonstone2 on Jan 5, 2014 18:01:31 GMT -5
Thing is though, what's stopping him from simply retiring? 2015 will be his age 36 season and he's made $90mm over his career. He's also won the WS twice now. What incentive would there be for him to play for $500k? Lackey? Is that you? How often do we hear players retire because they aren't going to make enough money? Players almost always keep playing as long as they can physically be successful. We see players end their careers making a lot less money than they did in their prime all the time. If Lackey is still pitching at a high level, I doubt he retires because he's upset with his contract. He'll pitch out the year in hopes of continuing his career. I think this happens more than you think. The analogous situation who be players who are free agents and have major or minor league offers but turn them down either because they aren't high enough, don't want to play in the minors or they just simply don't want to play anymore. Jermaine Dye is a recent situation that comes to mind. I don't think that players keep playing until there are no more offers to play baseball professionally. With regards to the Lackey situation, it's very unique. No one that I know of has ever signed a contract with a club option for the MLB minimum. His incentive to not retire would be a possible contract he could sign for the 2016 season. I'd imagine there would be a mutual interest in tearing up the option and signing a new long-term contract.
|
|
|
Post by buffs4444 on Jan 5, 2014 18:44:41 GMT -5
Thing is though, what's stopping him from simply retiring? 2015 will be his age 36 season and he's made $90mm over his career. He's also won the WS twice now. What incentive would there be for him to play for $500k? If he's happy here, they would proceed as they have and not let it leak that they're even shopping him. But unless he's gone all in, gotten a shamrock tattoo and started dropping his R's, there's probably a way to get him to a different team that provides further incentive to keep pitching, such as Los Angeles Angels/Dodgers (history in the city), Texas/Houston (closer to home), etc. Definitely makes it at least a little more complicated, knowing that he "could" walk away.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Jan 5, 2014 20:41:19 GMT -5
There's also the fact that he might be motivated at least slightly by pride. Remember, the option was triggered when he missed an entire calendar year due to surgery on a pre-existing condition. If he's not traded, he may feel a sense of duty to pitch out that season.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Jan 6, 2014 11:33:11 GMT -5
There's no way in hell (IMO) that Lackey retires early because of the option. He's not that kind of guy. If he were that kind of guy, why would he bother working as hard as he did to come back the way he did? He could have just gone through the motions to get paid. He has pride.
|
|
|
Post by elguapo on Jan 6, 2014 11:34:49 GMT -5
Lackey could very likely get another big contract after 2015.
|
|
|