Trading Jon Lester (news and speculation thread)
- Thread starter Corsi
- Start date
- Status
Interfering in pennant races! Red Sox think they're bigger than the game!bosockboy said:
/Price
Just like the Punto trade/thread of 2012.bankshot1 said:
Hopefully this one works out just as well...
If Ben has any plans to do much more business before Thursday at 4, this probably needs to get done in the next 12 to 18 hours. I understand that they have a teaming approach at the deadline, but trades of Miller and Lackey are consequential enough that they probably need his detailed attention.
The overall number is substantially lower and they're off the books faster. I could easily see them making a play for either/both.BigSoxFan said:
If Lester does get done tomorrow, rather than Thursday it would give Ben and his folks another 24 hours to focus on the second wave of trading. Not that they can't multi-task, but it would be easier.
- or what DC said
- or what DC said
Agreed; Lester in Pittsburgh would also not damage the chances of him coming back to Boston in the offseason. I'm not sure the same can be said of other places, especially LA, Seattle, and St. LouisDrewDawg said:
This is really an epically shitty time for the franchise. Lester was a homegrown Red Sox, who survived a bout with cancer (and grew up on a team that started the Jimmy Fund). He helped bring home two series titles and tossed a no hitter for the Sox. He has been an absolutely horse, was the one person who stood up and held himself accountable during the ridiculous chicken and beer BS, and has been pretty much your model Red Sox during his career. Now he's been traded because Lucky had to "win" the negotiation and lowballed him terribly.
4/70 is something you offer a 2/3 starter in today's market. Not a horse. Is Lester a top 5 pitcher? No, but he's a top 15.
We're not getting the prospects we hope for either. We'll be lucky to pry Bell and Ramirez from the Pirates. Piscotty and Jenkins from the Cards. Pederson and Van Slyke from LAD. There will be no Seager/Urias/Tavares/Polanco. Further, at the end of the year, when he signs for the NYY and pitches against the Sox 3-4 times a year, it's going to be a real issue.
They should go hat in hand and offer him 6/144. But Lucky doesn't grovel.
4/70 is something you offer a 2/3 starter in today's market. Not a horse. Is Lester a top 5 pitcher? No, but he's a top 15.
We're not getting the prospects we hope for either. We'll be lucky to pry Bell and Ramirez from the Pirates. Piscotty and Jenkins from the Cards. Pederson and Van Slyke from LAD. There will be no Seager/Urias/Tavares/Polanco. Further, at the end of the year, when he signs for the NYY and pitches against the Sox 3-4 times a year, it's going to be a real issue.
They should go hat in hand and offer him 6/144. But Lucky doesn't grovel.
dcmissle said:
The strategy doesn't have to come from Henry for him to be signing off on it. I doubt they do anything without his general approval. He's a smart guy and wouldn't have any trouble following the logic of whatever proposed path baseball ops brings to him. Just because he's not meddling like a Steinbrenner that doesn't mean he's completely out of the loops. All I'm saying is that if they brought him a plan and described it as risky, he might not have had a problem with it.
I'm looking back and I see moves that correspond well with the kind of thinking you'd expect from someone like Henry. They've tried to stay ahead of the curve, have taken chances, and seem to shift gears every few years, even if the underlying principle of long term risk aversion has been fairly consistent.
Also, the Lester situation may not be a hard and fast rule for players over 30. It may be pitchers over 30, it may be Lester specifically for reasons we don't know. As a general principle "Don't sign pitchers 30 or older to contracts of more than 5 years" doesn't seem crazy to me.
I'm not sure its Henry driving the bus there as much as giving cover to the baseball ops guys that if they make a valuation call and let a popular player walk that he will back them. If he's overriding Cherington's calls that's bad, but not sure it's worse than when Larry sticks his nose in.dcmissle said:
From reading this thread, any trade for Lester, would have to begin with:
St Louis: Taveres
Dodgers: Pederson or Seager
Pittsburgh: ???????
St Louis: Taveres
Dodgers: Pederson or Seager
Pittsburgh: ???????
Beckett's performance tonight(4.1 IP 9 H 4 R 4 BB and 105 pitches) can't be helping Ned's decision be any easier.
This is worse than a train wreck. If it were, there would be ILM level CGI special effects. Instead, we're all left trying to solve a 1000 piece puzzle with 9 pieces. Excruciating and much less visually stimulating. Yet, I can't stop refreshing!
Sent from my iPad using Sons of Sam Horn
Sent from my iPad using Sons of Sam Horn
He might well. But 4 years for whatever is still a lower risk than 6/120 or 6/144 or whatever folks seem convinced Lester is willing to accept, and it's off the books in 2018.BigSoxFan said:
I'm not necessarily endorsing this approach, but the difference is significant from a risk point of view.
dcmissle said:
Two things:
1) Henry no longer has to worry about running his hedge fund.
2) The Carl Crawford experience taught him that he shouldn't dismiss his own thoughts.
This organization has run into trouble when it has gone overboard with novel analytics {Mike Cameron, Carl Crawford} or the owners have over-ruled the best judgment of baseball Ops {BobbyV}. Letting Lester depart looks to be a perfect storm of both.
I obviously disagree. Watching Lester these past two years has all the signs of the classic late blooming lefthander who has just figured it all out. I think he will be behind Felix and Kershaw the next three years, yes. And Scherzer as well. But he will also not be as expensive. I think for the next three years Lester will be among the top five best pitchers in baseball. Only time will tell.xjack said:
But even if he is in teh top seven. or even ten, with his playoff status proven he is still worth it for the nextvthree years with this teams income stream. I would understand it if this were the Royals, or the Brewers, or even the White Sox or Giants. But with the gold mine that is NESN when ratings are high, and marketing and tickets and the relative low payroll that all these young guys who are coming up will cost, why not Lester at 140 to 150? Papi is gone in two years. Then you have Pedroia. Then whom? Its not like this team is drowning in bad contacts and cant affird him. And if the idea is to save the money for payroll flexibility to go spend 200 million on Scherzer, why? Why not save 50 to 60 million and simply sign Lester? Is Lester as good? No. But he is good enough when you consider saving 60 million, which will give you the all important payroll flexibility.
P'tucket said:
Yeah, they have shown a willingness to overpay on short years for exactly those kinds of players. Getting locked into a 6 or 7 year deal for a pitcher in his 30's is risky. I can understand the reluctance on their part. I'd probably make an exception for Lester if it was my call, but I can't get behind the torches and pitchforks for not going there. Losing Lester will sting, possibly more than the loss of any other player under this ownership group, but it's not going to kill the franchise long term and it's not a sign that they're adopting the Rays model.
I'd be okay with a rotation of Shields, Santana, Buchholz, RDLR and Workman. Or if they keep Lackey, one of those two free agents and the rest. That's a playoff caliber rotation.
Raise your hand(s) and think this through.foulkehampshire said:
Sent from my iPad using Sons of Sam Horn
Gordon Edes @GordonEdes 34s Six teams still in on Lester, according to source with direct knowledge: Dodgers, Cardinals, Pirates, Blue Jays, Orioles, Athletics
https://twitter.com/GordonEdes/status/494334230642827264
MakMan44 said:
I doubt it. He has had a serious lack of consistency over his career. He can be really good, but he can also be pretty bad. Two good years in a row is encouraging, and if the Sox need to rebuild the rotation after trading both Lester and Lackey, it's a bet I would make, but his struggles in 2007, 2009 and 2012 are going to keep the years down.
I'm not sure who Oakland would have in their system that would be enticing. They just moved Russell and McKinley, who were their two best prospects.
I agree, I think he's a good target but he might be looking for his last contract. I think we both agree he won't get it, but I don't think it's much of a stretch to suggest that it's going to be his starting point this offseason.Snodgrass'Muff said:
Went to the game tonight and it was the quietest 38,000 you'll ever hear. Jays fans all over and a beatiful night weather wise.
On the way back heard plenty of angry callers and reading this thread the same tune
3 Things
1) Lester will get traded- They've backed themselves into such a corner that they must have ascertained that the haul would be at least better then a compensation pick. STL or LA is interesting because you could work something out with the money regarding underperforming but high upside bats and a prospect ( Kemp or Craig as the bat ) If its solely prospects you'd think the range is in the 30-50's consensus for at least one of the prospects.
2) The FO isn't going to ride in during the offseason and offer market value. Not going to happen. They've made their choice.
3) More shoes to drop- Miller maybe Lackey who knows its supposedly a sellers market
On the way back heard plenty of angry callers and reading this thread the same tune
3 Things
1) Lester will get traded- They've backed themselves into such a corner that they must have ascertained that the haul would be at least better then a compensation pick. STL or LA is interesting because you could work something out with the money regarding underperforming but high upside bats and a prospect ( Kemp or Craig as the bat ) If its solely prospects you'd think the range is in the 30-50's consensus for at least one of the prospects.
2) The FO isn't going to ride in during the offseason and offer market value. Not going to happen. They've made their choice.
3) More shoes to drop- Miller maybe Lackey who knows its supposedly a sellers market
- Status