EvilEmpire said:Lackey had plenty of chances to say the same thing while still in Boston. He didn't.
twibnotes said:Who cares about a year and a half ago. Lackey and his cheap contract are valuable today, and we moved him for a nice reliever and a guy who doesn't really fit our team and who, more importantly, has been pretty awful (and hurt) this year.
The deal hinges on Craig getting healthy and productive - not sure what the odds are of that, but I would have hoped for something better for Lackey.
twibnotes said:He does deserve some flack for failing to appreciate that the $500K salary is a more than fair trade off for the total lack of productivity he gave for half the deal...to say nothing of the fact that it's the deal he agreed to.
rembrat said:
Did anyone ask him?
I would argue that it isn't very often a player hits his prime and he falls off a cliff. It is certainly a possibility that Allen Craig never returns to form. I think it's pretty clear that if he was hitting as well as he had previously hit, we would have never gotten close to this trade. With that said, this is the epitome of a buy low candidate. I certainly feel that the risk is worth the reward when it comes to Allen Craig.Savin Hillbilly said:
That one's a stretch, methinks.
I hope you're right, but the FG article linked to upthread makes a pretty good case that you may not be. And it's kind of an annoying non sequitur, when people are arguing that someone may not be the player he used to be, to respond with, "what's the matter with you people? Look what he's done in the past." It would be like a Cardinals fan complaining that they got shit value for Craig and pointing to Lackey's 2011 season. Sometimes when a player's performance takes a sharp turn for better or worse, it's random. Sometimes it's not. If you're going to argue that in Craig's case it's the former, at least acknowledge that the latter is also possible instead of just dismissing people who are concerned about it as "insufferable."
John Henry...Rudy Pemberton said:Sox now have at least 7 players with double first names.
Joe Kelly
Allen Craig
Jackie bradley
Stephen Drew
David Ross
Allen Webster
Alex Wilson
Now, the plan is becoming clearer.
rembrat said:
Did anyone ask him?
While Lackey agreed to the contract structure that would potentially have him in line to make rookie money, the right-hander expressed some pause about the idea of actually doing so. He didn’t draw lines in the sand, but he also stopped short of saying unequivocally that he would pitch for the Red Sox next year even if it meant doing so at a salary of roughly $500,000.
“I haven’t thought that far ahead. Just thinking about pitching right now. It’s definitely something I’ll have to think about at the end of the season, whether I want to keep going, whether ‘¦ ,” Lackey trailed off. “There will be a lot of things to consider.”
twibnotes said:The deal hinges on Craig getting healthy and productive - not sure what the odds are of that, but I would have hoped for something better for Lackey.
Kenny F'ing Powers said:Seriously, what the fuck were people expecting for a 35 year old pitcher 2 years removed form Tommy John and who will not be pitching for his 500k contract next year? Peoples expectations were fucked up on this thing.
I worked with someone who's first name is Webster. Nice guy.Savin Hillbilly said:That one's a stretch, methinks.
Hey!Smiling Joe Hesketh said:
Wilson is not a first name. Or not a good one, anyway.
Valek123 said:
I agree with this but it seems to be easier to pickup starting pitching than power bats, so some risk was to be expected to get a potential middle of the order bat. We'll see what 2015 brings, hopefully he comes into the season healthy and closes his deficiencies in inside pitches that have appeared this season. Post steroid era, I'll take all the power bats we can get and hope they have a good game plan for pitching replacements. We'll certainly get a chance to see the kids the rest of 2014 to see who's real and who is going pumpkin.
Snodgrass'Muff said:This...
...after you posted this in another thread...
...bifurcated by a tweet stating Lackey intends to play for his league minimum option next year is amusing to say the least.
Theo Epstein's final gift to the Red Sox was the John Lackey contract he got absolutely eviscerated for at time. $500K option: Theo's idea.
Really? Are you insane!Hank Scorpio said:
I wanted Taveras and Martinez for Lackey, Puig and Seager for Lester, and then to trade Doubront and Middlebrooks for Giancarlo Stanton.
Today has been a colossal failure.
MakMan44 said:https://twitter.com/JeffPassan/status/494909366143709184
Webster Slaughter, Webster Poppadopolis.BigEazy said:I worked with someone who's first name is Webster. Nice guy.
But his fall is precipited by a serious foot injury. It's not out of nowhere.Kenny F'ing Powers said:I would argue that it isn't very often a player hits his prime and he falls off a cliff. It is certainly a possibility that Allen Craig never returns to form. I think it's pretty clear that if he was hitting as well as he had previously hit, we would have never gotten close to this trade. With that said, this is the epitome of a buy low candidate. I certainly feel that the risk is worth the reward when it comes to Allen Craig.
I've never stated with any confidence that he absolutely wouldn't play for the minimum next year, but I'll gladly make a Jimmy Fund bet that he's extended by the end of spring training next year. To me, anyways, a serious commitment to a discounted option year would have been, say, $5 million with a $1 million team buy-out. $500K just screams "placeholder to trigger negotiations" to me, and I'd guess both sides assumed as much when the agreement was signed.PedroKsBambino said:
I see Theo's PR machine still going strong...
Those of you who have been stating with confidence Lackey wouldn't play for $500k need to acknowledge there has been, and remains, absolutely zero evidence that was ever the case. Could it happen? Sure...but it could also happen with any other player on the roster too. Just because a bunch of people here who have never met the guy think it is possible doesn't mean it is so.
EvilEmpire said:Lackey had plenty of chances to say the same thing while still in Boston. He didn't.
However, yesterday Sabathia told George King of the New York Post that he will not opt out of the contract and explained that Lee’s current situation “has no effect on me at all.”
Plympton91 said:
It seems Craig's power disappeared after he signed a long-term contract. a similar phenomena have occurred with other players recently (Crawford's speed took a nose dive, for instance). Just sayin' Performance enhancing drugs have health risks, want to be around to enjoy those millions.
Kenny F'ing Powers said:I would argue that it isn't very often a player hits his prime and he falls off a cliff except when an injury has a permanent impact on his skils. It is certainly a possibility that Allen Craig never returns to form. I think it's pretty clear that if he was hitting as well as he had previously hit, we would have never gotten close to this trade. With that said, this is the epitome of a buy low candidate. I certainly feel that the risk is worth the reward when it comes to Allen Craig.
Ten years ago today I remember commenting that I couldn't think of another trade in which the same team kicked in the best player, the best prospect and the money. Now that one worked out ok.Plympton91 said:I don't expect Corey Littrell to ever pitch an inning in the major leagues, but it still is a bit irksome
that they had to include both money and another prospect when the Red Sox are the only ones taking any risk whatsoever in this deal. If Kelly is a middle reliever and Craig washes out of the rest of his $30 million, both of which are decidedly
nozero probabilities, they've done horribly. I think overall just Lackey for Craig/Kelly is an even trade; I don't see where the Red Sox should be the ones kicking in the sweeteners.
That's a pretty good bench for pinch-hitting purposes.Merkle's Boner said:Isn't Craig a pretty horrendous OFer too?
Is the plan to go with a primary OF of Cespedes/JBJ/Vic with Nava backing up LF and 1B, Holt backing up everyone, and Craig backing up Papi?? I really don't get where he fits in defensively.
Yes, Im assuming Carp is gone.
P'tucket said:I've never stated with any confidence that he absolutely wouldn't play for the minimum next year, but I'll gladly make a Jimmy Fund bet that he's extended by the end of spring training next year. To me, anyways, a serious commitment to a discounted option year would have been, say, $5 million with a $1 million team buy-out. $500K just screams "placeholder to trigger negotiations" to me, and I'd guess both sides assumed as much when the agreement was signed.
And injuries derailing a career is the norm?Savin Hillbilly said:
FTFY.
I mean, it's pretty surreal that anyone who watched Nomar Garciaparra's career could say something like that. Never mind Mo Vaughn and many, many others.
Yeah, it's a nice machine, but ...PedroKsBambino said:
I see Theo's PR machine still going strong...
Those of you who have been stating with confidence Lackey wouldn't play for $500k need to acknowledge there has been, and remains, absolutely zero evidence that was ever the case. Could it happen? Sure...but it could also happen with any other player on the roster too. Just because a bunch of people here who have never met the guy think it is possible doesn't mean it is so.
And injuries derailing a career is the norm?
Look, I agree that this whole trade is predicated on health. None of us, however, know if hes broken and the Sox seem to think he isn't.
dcmissle said:Yeah, it's a nice machine, but ...
Today provides some evidence that Ben was not joking about April "15.
That being the case, you need a pretty compelling argument for trading Lackey. I don't think it comes in the form of the two guys who we got in return. They are nice players with some upside, but in my view they don't warrant parting with Lackey on his contract if you think there will be smooth sailing.
I suspect the FO saw storm clouds, and unless they were hallucinating, that is more than enough reason to make this trade.
With all the young players, they can't afford sideshows or shit shows. There are 54 games left. Those will be meaningful games given the tightness of the playoff races. This is an invaluable developmental period for the kids. If it's handled properly everyone will get a ton out of it.
Professionalism and achievement also have to be the hallmarks if spring training. They just can't afford bad examples or major distractions.
I think this explains a couple of departures the last two days.
Color me surprised if Lackey doesn't bitch about that contract next Spring, and I wouldn't blame him. It's one thing making an agreement with one team which says if I don't provide the level of service you are expecting, then I will play the final year at a ridiculously cheap price. It's another going to a new team to which you have no affiliation and playing that year there.EvilEmpire said:
Exactly.
If Lackey had unequivocally told the Sox that he would honor his contract next year (as he apparently just did with the Cardinals), wouldn't the Sox have kept him or maybe developed a better trade market for him?
Definitely. Lackey would have much less trade value (if any) at the end of the year. It is just not reasonable to expect him to be content playing for $500K. So if you're the Red Sox, and you want to have him in your rotation next season, realistically you would have had to consider extending him for at least an additional year at a sufficient price to make the average salary look good. Same goes for any other team, which is why no one would have dealt much for him this offseason. Now he at least provides value down the stretch, which is what the Cardinals are paying for. They have negotiating leverage over him the following year, but I doubt that was a key motivation for them to make this deal.I suspect the FO saw storm clouds, and unless they were hallucinating, that is more than enough reason to make this trade.
redsahx said:
It is also worth noting that the Cardinals willingness to let him go isn't necessarily an indication that they think he is done. They have Taveras coming up and needing an outfield spot, and Matt Adams is having a good year over at first base. The only other spot for Craig would be LF, but Matt Holliday still has a couple years left on his deal. Given his struggles this year, they could afford to deal him without hurting their lineup in the short term, and have the organizational depth to cover his loss over the next few years.
Dan Haren,j44thor said:STL doesn't make many mistakes when it comes to letting go of players too early.
I'm having a hard time coming up with any quite frankly, they are a lot like the Braves in that regard.
strek1 said:NESN just showed Lackey getting in his truck in same parking area as Lester left from. Henry didn't show up for a hug. Maybe instead will pour a cup of beer on his head from a 2nd floor window