Well, to ghoff's point, if you offer him 6/$150 now he would likely sign it (I actually assume a bit less than that, but just for example).
Could also be that the team initiated postponing talks because they feel that it's become a distraction. Which, BTW, it has.P'tucket said:Safe to assume the "Industry source" is Lester's agent. Looks like just a tactical countermove to make it clear that negotiations aren't stuck because they're asking for the moon.
Edit--what dc said.
bankshot1 said:There is nothing from preventing the Sox/Lester from doing anything at any time. Other teams can talk to Lester (IIRC) 5 days after the conclusion of the World Series. My assumption is that Lester will test the market. But at least if he does let him know there is a strong offer from the Sox. If it needs to be sweetened after the mega-offers come in, then at least he's not comparing the mega-offer with the 4/70.
glennhoffmania said:
So basically what I guessed a few minutes ago. At least there's a glimmer of hope then.
P'tucket said:Safe to assume the "Industry source" is Lester's agent. Looks like just a tactical countermove to make it clear that negotiations aren't stuck because they're asking for the moon.
Edit--what dc said.
TORONTO - It looks like Jon Lester’s career with the Red Sox is about to come to a conclusion after Red Sox owner John Henry said in an e-mail to the Boston Herald that talks were off until the offseason.
“Doesn’t mean anything,” Lester rebutted Thursday morning. “There’s been plenty of guys who have taken less to come back. Mikey Lowell had more years and money with the Phillies and he came back. It’s not the end-all for everybody. I’ve expressed to them I want to be here.”
Oversimplified, but I don't think Lester is taking their call this offseason if he's traded at the deadline. If he's moved, the Sox offer 6/150, and the Yankees offer 6/140, I think he's a Yankee.glennhoffmania said:Awesome. Great work, FO. I say trade him and then offer him 6/150 in the offseason. If he accepts, great. You just locked up a great pitcher plus you got a couple of prospects and it doesn't cost a pick. If he rejects, you never had a shot anyway.
I will be much more upset if they start making decisions based on PR than I am about losing Lester. They are making a decision about Lester's value and we can disagree or agree with it (I think they botched it and am very curious what plan B entails, but am not as angry/upset as most on here), but playing PR games or making personnel decisions based on PR is a much more fundamental problem. They're making a bet on Lester's valuation going forward and they need to own it and basically ignore the fan reactions. If they think they can't sign Lester (and they may not think this yet) and get better than a comp pick offer, move him and take the pick. If they think Cole Hamels on a shorter deal is better value even including prospects, trade for Hamels. If they think Masterson for 4 years is better than Lester for 6 years, sign Masterson. If they think rolling the dice with Lackey/Buchholz and the kids and maybe a Dempster like short-term deal is the right move, do that. They've got a track record of success and spending on the team and losing Lester, while it sucks, doesn't by itself doom the team going forward.I agree. I'm just calling the RS on their smartest-kid-in-the-class approach.
If they really believe what has been leaked, cold logic dictates dealing him to the highest bidder at the deadline if, as appears likely, the RS are realistically out if it. They think they are right and the other guy isn't. Therefore, they should be indifferent to the other guy's upside because theirs' be greater long term. And the PR angle should not matter one bit if you have that conviction.
In for a dime, in for a dollar, if you really think you're right. And, by the way, this should preclude overpaying for age 39 mediocrity in the offseason to dress things up.
Do they have the guts? I don't think so.
Corsi said:
Yankees to winbosockboy said:If you were betting, do you take the Yankees or "The Field" for Lester this winter?
bankshot1 said:The Sox FO has acted iike a small-market team, so risk-adverse that they have seemingly ruled out 30+ segment of the premium player FA market.
I wonder if something else is going on, other than not sending Lester a birthday card when he turns 31 next January.
Stitch01 said:Oversimplified, but I don't think Lester is taking their call this offseason if he's traded at the deadline. If he's moved, the Sox offer 6/150, and the Yankees offer 6/140, I think he's a Yankee.
I will be much more upset if they start making decisions based on PR than I am about losing Lester. They are making a decision about Lester's value and we can disagree or agree with it (I think they botched it and am very curious what plan B entails, but am not as angry/upset as most on here), but playing PR games or making personnel decisions based on PR is a much more fundamental problem. They're making a bet on Lester's valuation going forward and they need to own it and basically ignore the fan reactions. If they think they can't sign Lester (and they may not think this yet) and get better than a comp pick offer, move him and take the pick. If they think Cole Hamels on a shorter deal is better value even including prospects, trade for Hamels. If they think Masterson for 4 years is better than Lester for 6 years, sign Masterson. If they think rolling the dice with Lackey/Buchholz and the kids and maybe a Dempster like short-term deal is the right move, do that. They've got a track record of success and spending on the team and losing Lester, while it sucks, doesn't by itself doom the team going forward.
They should value him like they think is best for the team, thank him for his great years of service if he leaves, and ignore the short-term overreactions that will follow.
bankshot1 said:The Sox FO has acted iike a small-market team, so risk-adverse that they have seemingly ruled out 30+ segment of the premium player FA market.
I wonder if something else is going on, other than not sending Lester a birthday card when he turns 31 next January.
What are recent examples of NY not getting their man?bosockboy said:If you were betting, do you take the Yankees or "The Field" for Lester this winter?
nattysez said:I think all of this "we're done negotiating" stuff is just to get the press to leave them alone. No negotiation is ever "over" -- if you offer enough money, the negotiation is back on.
The team is going to miss the playoffs, giving them all of October to negotiate an extension before Lester can talk with other teams. So "waiting until the end of the season," even if it were true, needn't cause panic.
Logic dictates that the Sox are going to wind up paying Lester. While I have come to loathe this FO, there is little chance these guys are seriously contemplating going into next season with Lackey (unhappy at being paid $500k for the year) or Buchholz (the new Dice-K in terms of potential + performance + watchability) as the ace of the staff. Given that there is no one who will be on the market who is likely to match Lester's performance at a lower price, common sense says they'll sign him.
Seems like the Tigers would just pay Scherzer in that case.bankshot1 said:Yankees to win
Tigers in close pursuit
LeeWhat are recent examples of NY not getting their man?
Cano
...
...
We're talking about a guy who was ready to sign for Homer Bailey + $1 preseason. His price has undoubtedly gone up, but if Lester was asking for a Kershaw or Felix deal, you can be very, very sure that the FO would make sure we know about it.Max Power said:
Isn't that entirely dependent on their definition of what a pitcher of Lester's caliber is? If they think it's Felix or Kershaw, they're asking for the moon.
That was where I was going, but didn't want to seem too reactionary.It's why I think if someone offered them say 2 billion plus for the team they'd seriously consider it even if Henry insisted a couple years ago there was no way they would sell.
I've been crying about Lester to the MFY for those reasons and others like their need for LH starters in the Urinal, for some time. So I agree.bosockboy said:Seems like the Tigers would just pay Scherzer in that case.
With no Tanaka, no Sabathia, a year older Kuroda and who knows with Pineda, it's hard to imagine the Yankees not blowing it out of the water.
Snodgrass'Muff said:
This is besides the point, but seriously? You loathe the front office that has brought us 3 titles in the last 10 seasons?
We have no proof that Lester was prepared to take "$1 more than Homer Bailey". The preponderance of evidence seems to strongly suggest otherwise.P'tucket said:We're talking about a guy who was ready to sign for Homer Bailey + $1 preseason. His price has undoubtedly gone up, but if Lester was asking for a Kershaw or Felix deal, you can be very, very sure that the FO would make sure we know about it.
Not that the counter-statements this morning had anything to do with actual numbers, anyways.
Right now? No Im not assuming that. If they ship him off at the trading deadline after he said that he wants to be here repeatedly during the season and after they lowballed him in the Spring? Yeah, I don't think he's coming backBCsMightyJoeYoung said:
I am assuming you believe Lester's camp was so completely insulted by the opening offer and pissed off that that will outweigh 8! highly successful - and presumably happy - years in a Sox uniform. That's ludicrous
My bad. The latter part still stands, though. The FO would be leaking numbers like a sieve if Lester asked for 2 cents above his likely market value this fall.DeJesus Built My Hotrod said:We have no proof that Lester was prepared to take "$1 more than Homer Bailey". The preponderance of evidence seems to strongly suggest otherwise.
nattysez said:
I hate the need to crush every guy who leaves the team,
I hate the fact that they are pocketing millions while using the Crawford/Beckett contracts as an excuse not to go after big FAs and pay Lester
I hate their arrogance -- the height of which was the hiring of Valentine
, though if it turns out it's true they low-balled Lester, that may trump that hiring in terms of arrogance.
I respect the winning, but I hate how they go about it.
I also think that part of the new market condition needs to consider that the spending spree the new TV money is affording the middle and smaller market teams to go on is limited. These teams only have a few of these new bullets to fire into the big money targets and if they miss, and they will, there will be a market correction and potential opportunity for the big market teams to take advantage of.smastroyin said:To be honest, in a world were Homer Bailey gets $21 MM/year, it was completely unreasonable to think Lester would sign for less than $20.
Maybe Bailey's contract will be the outlier it deserves to be, but I have a feeling that the continued redistribution of revenue will continue to edge up first and second tier pitcher and premier position player salaries. Then you have to wonder whether the Red Sox are smart to stay out of that until the money is stabilized, or if they are just lagging in adjusting to new market conditions.
Growing up, for whatever not rational reason I was a big Cowboys fan. Jerry Jones won a bunch of Super Bowls with the Cowboys when he first took over, but as the team was winning those Super Bowls I was gradually becoming a Patriots' fan. It happens.Snodgrass'Muff said:
This is besides the point, but seriously? You loathe the front office that has brought us 3 titles in the last 10 seasons?
Rudy Pemberton said:Well, isn't it pretty clear that A and B are true? That just leaves C.
What's the value of a comp pick, and when do you see the return on that value? How do you measure the range of value (there's a good chance it's zero), and it's importance to the GM given the potential need to win now or soon.
The way Lester has been pitching, and the way so many teams are clustered together, he could really push a team over the edge and help someone win the WS (or at least that's the way a team can sell it to its fan base).
Milwaukee, SF, St.Louis, LAD, LAA...tons of potential fits here.
dcmissle said:It probably will be demonstrated soon whether Ellsbury represented a turning point in handling player departures.
Going back 40 years, for every Ellsbury we've had a half dozen guys handled poorly when it comes to players of note.
Over three ownerships this has not been an area of strength.
I'm pretty sure the Yankees will be signing both Scherzer and Lester. Then everyone around here will point out how they won't be very good in 3 or 4 years and the Yankees will finally, really, honestly, this time it's true even though it never was before, have hamstrung themselves with too many large unproductive contracts.bankshot1 said:I've been crying about Lester to the MFY for those reasons and others like their need for LH starters in the Urinal, for some time. So I agree.
But the point was if Scherzer walks, the Tigers are in the market for a 30-someting premium pitcher too, and they've shown the ability to spend.
ALiveH said:He's not gone until the Boston Globe starts putting out hit pieces on him to win the PR battle. If they start talking about chicken & beer, he's gone.
Plympton91 said:I'm pretty sure the Yankees will be signing both Scherzer and Lester. Then everyone around here will point out how they won't be very good in 3 or 4 years and the Yankees will finally, really, honestly, this time it's true even though it never was before, have hamstrung themselves with too many large unproductive contracts.
How are the Yankees this year?Plympton91 said:I'm pretty sure the Yankees will be signing both Scherzer and Lester. Then everyone around here will point out how they won't be very good in 3 or 4 years and the Yankees will finally, really, honestly, this time it's true even though it never was before, have hamstrung themselves with too many large unproductive contracts.