|
Post by soxfan06 on Nov 25, 2014 16:25:11 GMT -5
Missing out on Lester would be a big loss. It's the one frontline guy you could get buy only using money (no prospects, don't lose a draft pick). Then you could put those other resources to use. At what point do the Red Sox back out though? Is he really worth $25 mil a year, over 6 years? That's not really the question though. It's more is overpaying Lester a better option than giving up at least 2 top prospects for Cole Hamels? If anything thinks overpaying Lester isn't the better solution than that is just silly. Unless the Phillies decide to trade Hamels for 2 dimes and a nickel, signing a FA is much more reasonable. Even if you have to overpay $2-3 million a year.
|
|
|
Post by greatscottcooper on Nov 25, 2014 16:26:28 GMT -5
If the Sox are breaking all their own rules this off season then why not just tack on another year with Lester and keep the AAV down low. Does something in the 7 year $135-$150 range bring him back to Boston???
|
|
|
Post by soxfan06 on Nov 25, 2014 16:26:33 GMT -5
This is why I wasn't a fan of starting negotiations out at 6 years/$110-$120 million. Everyone knew that wouldn't get it done. Red Sox should have went in their and made him an offer he couldn't refuse and got him off the market immediately.
|
|
|
Post by grandsalami on Nov 25, 2014 16:31:22 GMT -5
“@thekapman: Just to be clear on Jon Lester. Good source says #Cubs made significant offer. 2nd source says $ not big factor for Lester. May be less.”
“@thekapman: Three MLB sources this afternoon tell me Lester likes Cubs and Chicago a lot but all 3 would be surprised if he didn't go back to Boston.”
“@thekapman: @tvran23 Conflicting thougts on offers. Boston still thought to be favorite from MLB sources I talked to today.”
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Nov 25, 2014 16:31:43 GMT -5
I can live with missing out on Leater but i just hope we're sensible and don't give up much for Hamels. If Sox miss out on Lester, Hamels may become more expensive. Cubs, Dodgers, Texas, Orioles and a couple other teams could still be in the hunt to trade for him. More teams up the ante. If Lester signs elsewhere, I am worried about them signing Shields (that is - I do NOT want him). Age and number of pitches throw is really working against more than 2 years for him. As much as I think Scherzer for 7 is the same as Lester for 6, I don't think the Sox will do that either. So Hamels may become a (prospect expensive) endgame. And they'd have to pick up that 5th year option.
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 11,139
|
Post by nomar on Nov 25, 2014 16:33:16 GMT -5
This is why I wasn't a fan of starting negotiations out at 6 years/$110-$120 million. Everyone knew that wouldn't get it done. Red Sox should have went in their and made him an offer he couldn't refuse and got him off the market immediately. I disagree. I know he's a homegrown stud and has been great for the last 1.5 seasons, but Lester hasn't been completely consistent throughout his career. There's no guarantees that a 6 year deal will go well at the AAV he will get. Given the alternatives out there, though none may be Lester, I don't think we were in a position where we had to blow Lester away right away.
|
|
|
Post by Smittyw on Nov 25, 2014 16:33:41 GMT -5
If the Sox aren't willing to pay up for Lester, why even talk about the possibility of Scherzer? He's already turned down 6/144.
If we lose out on Lester, then you're looking at Shields and/or paying Amaro's price for Hamels (what I'm most afraid of).
|
|
|
Post by chavopepe2 on Nov 25, 2014 16:34:43 GMT -5
This is why I wasn't a fan of starting negotiations out at 6 years/$110-$120 million. Everyone knew that wouldn't get it done. Red Sox should have went in their and made him an offer he couldn't refuse and got him off the market immediately. I don't think there is any reason to believe this would have worked.
|
|
alnipper
Veteran
Living the dream
Posts: 619
|
Post by alnipper on Nov 25, 2014 16:35:54 GMT -5
If the Sox are smart and want Lester then it will take 6yr/140 million. I have thought that from the beginning. I don't want the Sox to pay prospects for Hamels. If Moncaca costs 80 million after taxes, and the Sox are willing to pay that. Paying Lester 140 million over 6 years should be the better risk.
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 11,139
|
Post by nomar on Nov 25, 2014 16:36:04 GMT -5
I can live with missing out on Leater but i just hope we're sensible and don't give up much for Hamels. If Sox miss out on Lester, Hamels may become more expensive. Cubs, Dodgers, Texas, Orioles and a couple other teams could still be in the hunt to trade for him. More teams up the ante. If Lester signs elsewhere, I am worried about them signing Shields (that is - I do NOT want him). Age and number of pitches throw is really working against more than 2 years for him. As much as I think Scherzer for 7 is the same as Lester for 6, I don't think the Sox will do that either. So Hamels may become a (prospect expensive) endgame. And they'd have to pick up that 5th year option. Completely see where you're coming from, but even with a bidding war I don't think we'd give up Bogaerts or Betts for Hamels. And if the bidding for Hamels gets too high, I think we'd bow out rather than getting desperate.
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 11,139
|
Post by nomar on Nov 25, 2014 16:37:01 GMT -5
If the Sox are smart and want Lester then it will take 6yr/140 million. I have thought that from the beginning. I don't want the Sox to pay prospects for Hamels. If Moncaca costs 80 million after taxes, and the Sox are willing to pay that. Paying Lester 140 million over 6 years should be the better risk. The majority of that 80 mil wouldn't count towards the payroll/luxury tax.
|
|
alnipper
Veteran
Living the dream
Posts: 619
|
Post by alnipper on Nov 25, 2014 16:41:11 GMT -5
I know it won't. I think Lester at 140 million is a better risk/reward than Moncada.
|
|
|
Post by theburn on Nov 25, 2014 16:57:17 GMT -5
A few moments ago on the 98.5 Hub, Jake Wesley says he expects the Red Sox to explore trading Bogaerts for Hamels. Please, no.
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Nov 25, 2014 17:02:08 GMT -5
Meanwhile, if pitches thrown count for anything (pending the all-important pre-signing MRI, of course), since entering MLB, pitches throw, according to FanGraphs are:
Shields (age 33 on opening day, 2015): 29464 Lester (age 31 on opening day, 2015): 26328 Hamels (age 31 on opening day, 2015) 27887 Scherzer (age 30 on opening day, 2015): 20947
This is why I am (at least in theory) OK with Scherzer for 7 if they are willing to do Lester for 6. I say in theory because I think it's playing with fire to give any pitcher over 31 more than 5 years, no matter how well you know him.
|
|
|
Post by youngbillrussell on Nov 25, 2014 17:02:34 GMT -5
According to 14 year old prophecy Jake Wesley who was just on felger and maz says Lester has a deal from the Red Sox for 6 years $130M and a offer from the Cubs for 6 years $135M.
He also says Sox have had conversations with the Nationals about trading Cespedes for a Pitchng Prospect contingent on them trading Jayson Werth for a better Pitchng prospect.
Thinks that they'll trade Bogaerts if needed for pitching then slide Hanley back to SS and have less of a logjam in the outfield.
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Nov 25, 2014 17:02:54 GMT -5
A few moments ago on the 98.5 Hub, Jake Wesley says he expects the Red Sox to explore trading Bogaerts for Hamels. Please, no. Who is Jake Wesley? Really. I don't know his work. ADDED: Ok, now I know. Still do not believe.
|
|
|
Post by redsox1534 on Nov 25, 2014 17:03:58 GMT -5
If you get Lester it may raise the chances of us keeping Betts. And trading one if not both of Castillo and Cespedes. Money will need to be saved some and why not deal Castillo. He certanitly would have a market.
My of would be Ramirez, Betts, Victorino/Nava/Trade/FA. Deal Cespedes and Castillo for SP or prospects. Craig for prospects or SP.
Cespedes, Devin Marrero, Craig, Anthony Ranuado, Garin Checchini for Mat Latos, Jay Bruce and young RP. Might not be anuff to get a deal done some may say were giving up to much but that would be the idea I have.
|
|
|
Post by dcsoxfan on Nov 25, 2014 17:05:53 GMT -5
MLB has made it hard to acquire high-end talent without being really bad. There are only a half dozen to a dozen impact talents in any draft class; it's hard to draft high-end talent without a high pick.
When MLB imposes an International Draft, it will become even harder.
Trading a potentially high-end cost controlled player (Betts, Bogaerts, Swihart, Margot, Devers and maybe Owens and Rodriguez) for a pitcher with a $100 million contract in a year in which the FA market is glutted with pitching would be an unmitigated disaster. I would rather the Red Sox built a rotation of second-tier starters augmented by a power bullpen ( like the O's and Royals) than trade for Hamels.
|
|
|
Post by soxfan06 on Nov 25, 2014 17:06:24 GMT -5
I will literally not watch a game next season if they sell low on Bogaerts.
Even the thought of it makes me sick. Cherrington should be fired on the spot if he even considered that.
|
|
|
Post by freddysthefuture2003 on Nov 25, 2014 17:06:30 GMT -5
If you get Lester it may raise the chances of us keeping Betts. And trading one if not both of Castillo and Cespedes. Money will need to be saved some and why not deal Castillo. He certanitly would have a market. My of would be Ramirez, Betts, Victorino/Nava/Trade/FA. Deal Cespedes and Castillo for SP or prospects. Craig for prospects or SP. Cespedes, Devin Marrero, Craig, Anthony Ranuado, Garin Checchini for Mat Latos, Jay Bruce and young RP. Might not be anuff to get a deal done some may say were giving up to much but that would be the idea I have. Castillo isnt going anywhere
|
|
|
Post by kman22 on Nov 25, 2014 17:10:59 GMT -5
I had no problem belieVing this kid until I heard him imply that the Sox would rather trade Bogaerts than Cespedes. That's both scary to think about and stupid. Despite his accuracy thus far, I refuse to believe Hamels is the SP that Bogaerts would net.
|
|
|
Post by soxfan06 on Nov 25, 2014 17:12:49 GMT -5
It would be very Red Sox to trade the guy who was recently regarded as the top prospect in baseball for a very good but not elite pitcher.
Not even the Astros do that crap.
|
|
|
Post by youngbillrussell on Nov 25, 2014 17:18:28 GMT -5
I think it's just an option, if the Sox sign Lester no way they trade for Hamels.
|
|
redsox04071318champs
Veteran
Always hoping to make my handle even longer...
Posts: 15,808
Member is Online
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Nov 25, 2014 17:30:54 GMT -5
If the Red Sox compound the mistake of not signing Lester with dealing Bogaerts to Philly for Hamels, I will be really, really ticked off. That would make me question how bright the Sox are.
Yeah, we get that it sometimes takes time for young players to blossom, but this guy was 21 for crying out loud.
My first worry is that I'm thinking if Lester isn't so much into the money, and so eager to re-sign with the Red Sox, then why hasn't it happened yet?
The best case scenario is that he wants to extract the most money he can - from the Red Sox before re-signing him.
But there is an alternate possibility that is a very strong possibility - he is quite willing to go elsewhere and isn't that gaga about going back to the Red Sox.
I'm thinking the Cubs sign Lester and the Red Sox might overreact by doing something really stupid which is make Amaro look like a genius.
I would guess the Sox would get back Jimmy Rollins? Isn't he a 10-5 guy who can veto a deal? Would the Sox really play Hanley at SS and pray that Marrero hits enough to become their SS?
Do the Sox really want to trade away a young guy who will most likely be an all-star player capable of hitting 30 homers per year?
Now I'm getting quite worried.
|
|
|
Post by soxfan06 on Nov 25, 2014 17:31:11 GMT -5
It shouldn't even be considered as a option.
|
|