Extending Lester

[flymrfreakjar]

 
 
Again, his WHIP declined every season -- until Farrell left town. Since Farrell's return it's been going down again, down to a career-best level in 2014.

I'm sure it's been covered a bunch of times, but I remember when Farrell was still on the Indians, they interviewed him about the Sox pitching staff (and Beckett was having a terrific year). He said that Lester had the best stuff on the whole team, and he really hadn't been pitching well yet. I think Farrell may have a very special relationship with Lester as a coach.

 

[bosockboy]

If he gets to FA he might get 8/200.

 

[Reverend]

He is a comp in this unintended sense. Both had monster years heading into FA. Both handled the pressure of that walk year impressively and in a team oriented way -- CC putting himself at risk with ridiculous stints/Lester entirely compartmentalizing the contract crap and focusing on his pitching.

In Lester's case, this will only polish of image of big game pitcher immune to pressure.

He is really projecting to clean up in FA. Perfect storm indeed

 
Farrell has said that after he was hired after the debacle of 2012, he and the rest of the FO sat down to discuss reloading. A key part of their strategy was the "total baseball" philosophy they were instituting and they discussed who to build around. He said Pedroia was unanimous; Lester wa almost unanimous.
 
Lester has proved the assessment of his character as a teammate, gamer and all around baseball citizen in addition to strong performances and reliability. Who knows what will happen, but it's hard to imagine that Farrell doesn't want him back.

 

[TheoShmeo]

If I'm not mistaken, Farrell has always been a big Lester booster and I agree, he is almost assuredly a big advocate of bringing Jon back.  But I doubt that much of anyone on the on field staff or baseball ops doesn't agree.  It's just a matter of price and whether their apparent misplay of the early negotiations will lead Lester to test the market and the Yankees (or less likely, someone else) to make Lester an offer that the Sox will be unwilling to match (if they get the chance).  Sadly, it's hard to imagine Lester not testing the market at this point and another team not giving Lester a contract that exceeds the Sox limits.

 

[Reverend]

If I'm not mistaken, Farrell has always been a big Lester booster and I agree, he is almost assuredly a big advocate of bringing Jon back.  But I doubt that much of anyone on the on field staff or baseball ops doesn't agree.  It's just a matter of price and whether their apparent misplay of the early negotiations will lead Lester to test the market and the Yankees (or less likely, someone else) to make Lester an offer that the Sox will be unwilling to match (if they get the chance).  Sadly, it's hard to imagine Lester not testing the market at this point and another team not giving Lester a contract that exceeds the Sox limits.

 
I agree with all this. I was just pointing out that, according to Farrell anyway, there is also widespread agreement in the FO as to Lester's value to the team's overall approach.
 
I also want to add that I think he can test the market and still offer the Red Sox a discount. The question is will it be enough a discount for the Red Sox. Overall, though, I don't see testing the market as inconsistent with his statement that he'd take a discount; did her anywhere qualify the statement with a conditional that he'd take a discount if they got it done before the end of the season or something? I don't recall reading that anywhere, but if anyone has, I'd be interested in reading it.

 

[TheoShmeo]

 
I agree with all this. I was just pointing out that, according to Farrell anyway, there is also widespread agreement in the FO as to Lester's value to the team's overall approach.
 
I also want to add that I think he can test the market and still offer the Red Sox a discount. The question is will it be enough a discount for the Red Sox. Overall, though, I don't see testing the market as inconsistent with his statement that he'd take a discount; did her anywhere qualify the statement with a conditional that he'd take a discount if they got it done before the end of the season or something? I don't recall reading that anywhere, but if anyone has, I'd be interested in reading it.

He did not say that, and your belief/hope is not contradicted by a comment on the record.
 
And if he is to be believed, he really does want to stay in Boston.  So the scenario of him taking a discount after he hits the market is not impossible to believe.
 
But...history tells us that most guys are gone when they hit the market.  There have been some players (like Jeter, Bernie Williams and Napoli) who have tested the waters and neverthelss stayed with their current team.  I just think there are more examples the other way and I have some fear that the Sox conduct with that silly offer MIGHT have really soured the kitty litter, notwithstanding Ben Cherington's denial the other day on D&C (citing the 12-year relationship as larger than any one step in the negotiations).

 

[RedOctober3829]

John Farrell is definitely a Lester guy. In fact, he was the guy who lobbied for him as an untouchable prospect when it came to dealing for Johan Santana.

 

[snowmanny]

Screw the "discount" narrative. Unless by "discount" we mean reasonable market value based on recent signings and trends vs. whatever crazy amount one of the Dodgers/Yankees/Mariners/Etc. might offer in order to blow away the field. The time for a discount was in March. At this point the Red Sox best hope is to offer basically the same amount that other high-revenue teams could be expected to offer in November.

 

[snowmanny]

He did not say that, and your belief/hope is not contradicted by a comment on the record.
 
And if he is to be believed, he really does want to stay in Boston.  So the scenario of him taking a discount after he hits the market is not impossible to believe.
 
But...history tells us that most guys are gone when they hit the market.  There have been some players (like Jeter, Bernie Williams and Napoli) who have tested the waters and neverthelss
stayed with their current team.  I just think there are more examples the other way and I have some fear that the Sox conduct with that silly offer MIGHT have really soured the kitty litter,
notwithstanding Ben Cherington's denial the other day on D&C (citing the 12-year relationship as larger than any one step in the negotiations).

Is there anyone who took a substantial discount
(say, greater than $20-30 Million) after they hit free agency? I don't think Bernie Williams took a discount: I believe he offered Steinbrenner a chance to match and he did.

 

[HriniakPosterChild]

Is there anyone who took a substantial discount
(say, greater than $20-30 Million) after they hit free agency? I don't think Bernie Williams took a discount: I believe he offered Steinbrenner a chance to match and he did.

Jason Varitek, because he instructed Boras to negotiate only with the Red Sox.

 

[TheoShmeo]

Jason Varitek, because he instructed Boras to negotiate only with the Red Sox.

More recently, Mike Napoli took less to stay in Boston.
 
Not $20-30 mm less but still real coin.
 
http://bostonherald.com/sports/red_sox_mlb/clubhouse_insider/2013/12/mike_napoli_leaves_money_on_the_table_to_return_to_red
 
That doesn't mean that Jon Lester will do the same.  But it's not unheard of for guys who like their environment to take less money.

 

[Harry Hooper]

Not a huge difference between Lester's 2012 and 2013 peripherals. Maybe he rediscovered something late last summer that had eluded him since mid-2011, but the data don't support the Farrell narrative.

 
Check out the weirdness of ~June 2013 in the overall context.

 

[HriniakPosterChild]

More recently, Mike Napoli took less to stay in Boston.
 
Not $20-30 mm less but still real coin.
 
http://bostonherald.com/sports/red_sox_mlb/clubhouse_insider/2013/12/mike_napoli_leaves_money_on_the_table_to_return_to_red
 
That doesn't mean that Jon Lester will do the same.  But it's not unheard of for guys who like their environment to take less money.

Mike Lowell, too, because Philly offered an extra year.

Oh shit, that one ended badly.

 

[snowmanny]

I realize some players have taken a year less, or a slightly lower AAV, but I meant something in the realm of the "hometown discount" that some are hoping Lester will (still) take in free agency. If somebody offers 6/162, what's the discount? I'm guessing it's not even 5/125 anymore since I don't recall anyone leaving that much money on the table once they hit free agency and the offers were actually sitting there.

John Havlicek turned down a lot more money from the ABA in 1969 but I don't think that counts.

 

[bankshot1]

I think the discount, if it exists any longer, is no more than 10%. So the discount on 6/162, ($27MM AAV) a contract which probably only the NYYs or Detroit, if it loses Scherzer, can afford, would be about 6/145. IMO the Sox should offer a 6/132 ($22MM AAV), with options for another year or two based on IP in the latter years, in the next week, to show Lester they are serious, and gives him something to think about as he ponders the mega-offers he'll get in FA, but which will require him leaving his valued routine. IMO anything less than that would be a waste of time, and would only serve as a face-saving device..

 

[soxhop411]

I still think that if the Sox offer something reasonable right after the season (I think teams usually have two weeks of exclusive negotiating period with its free agents?) that something will get done before he has the chance to talk to other teams

 

[alwyn96]

How is CC at all a comp for Lester though? He's a fat guy who relied on elite velocity. Lester is neither.

 
Well, he's a lefty starter who was probably among the most durable in baseball until this year. Sure, he's fat (or was, now he looks like a deflated balloon), but it's not like non-fat pitchers don't also get hurt. I don't think we need to overthink this. Expensive pitcher gets hurt, and/or becomes ineffective. It happens all the time. Sabathia's just one more data point.
 
Of course, there are also guys like Schilling and Cliff Lee and I guess others who age like a fine wine. But I think for every one of those guys, there are probably, I don't know, 7 that turn into vinegar. If the Red Sox do sign Lester though, I hope he's a nice Chateau Margaux. 
 
EDIT: Or maybe, given Lester's terroir, a Domaine Serene. 

 

[bankshot1]

I still think that if the Sox offer something reasonable right after the season (I think teams usually have two weeks of exclusive negotiating period with its free agents?) that something will get done before he has the chance to talk to other teams

I think there's a 5 day window for FA to deal exclusively with their former team.

 

[soxhop411]

I think there's a 5 day window for FA to deal exclusively with their former team.

If the Sox do not make the playoffs they could begin talking an extension when the regular season ends though right? So they could come to a deal during the playoffs and just not announce it until the playoffs are done (given how MLB hates having news announced and overshadow the playoffs)

 

[bankshot1]

If the Sox do not make the playoffs they could begin talking an extension when the regular season ends though right? So they could come to a deal during the playoffs and just not announce it until the playoffs are done (given how MLB hates having news announced and overshadow the playoffs)

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.

 

[TomRicardo]

If the Sox do not make the playoffs they could begin talking an extension when the regular season ends though right? So they could come to a deal during the playoffs and just not announce it until the playoffs are done (given how MLB hates having news announced and overshadow the playoffs)

 
Just the World Series.

 

[maxotaur]

 
Dude - somebody's Lester-binky got dissed!  I'm prepared to talk about his hurt feelings all month long!

I think this is missing much of the point. Let's say you're very interested in a certain house with a $325K asking price so you hire an agent to negotiate this for you. Said agent then goes and offers a $190K initial offer and the owners (for many reasons) would prefer not to deal with the agent again.

Are you concerned with the owners feelings or are you upset you don't get the house you wanted and further have serious concerns about your agents ability to handle negotiations?

 

[alwyn96]

I think this is missing much of the point. Let's say you're very interested in a certain house with a $325K asking price so you hire an agent to negotiate this for you. Said agent then goes and offers a $190K initial offer and the owners (for many reasons) would prefer not to deal with the agent again.

Are you concerned with the owners feelings or are you upset you don't get the house you wanted and further have serious concerns about your agents ability to handle negotiations?

 
Since there's no actual asking price, it seems more analogous to a Zillow-style "make me move" type offer. I'd be concerned about the owner's motivation to sell if they didn't respond. 
 
NOTE: I know nothing about real estate. 

 

[maxotaur]

I still think that if the Sox offer something reasonable right after the season (I think teams usually have two weeks of exclusive negotiating period with its free agents?) that something will get done before he has the chance to talk to other teams

I'm not saying a strong offer would hurt. But if it reaches that point - would you sign? As for me, after a year of fumbled negotiations, my curiosity about other teams valuations would be far too great to let a couple of days stand in the way (even if I wanted to return).

If it doesn't get done rather soon what possible reason would cause him not to check the market out (even if he wants to return)?

 

[Apisith]

That 4/$70m offer looks more ridiculous by the day.

 

[MakMan44]

That 4/$70m offer looks more ridiculous by the day.

The whole process is stupid. Yes, there's some serious risk in aging pitchers but there's an inherent risk with any pitcher. Why not go above and beyond for YOUR guy? 

 

[Bob Montgomerys Helmet Hat]

The whole process is stupid. Yes, there's some serious risk in aging pitchers but there's an inherent risk with any pitcher. Why not go above and beyond for YOUR guy? 

Because there is serious risk.  It's really not stupid at all.  It's just business.

 

[tomdeplonty]

4/$70m looks dumb in retrospect, but we have no idea if it was the best offer the FO made - and that seems highly doubtful.
 
We only know what's being deliberately leaked. We don't know the true motivations of the players here. Does Lester really want to stay in Boston, or does he want to Get Paid? Does the FO really think FAs on the wrong side of 30 are systematically a terrible bet, and that this outweighs the apparent strategic advantages of paying Lester and being done with it?
 
I haven't got a clue. Less and less the longer it goes on.

 

[MakMan44]

Because there is serious risk.  It's really not stupid at all.  It's just business.

I'd agree if I thought there was a serious chance they went into next season without a real Lester replacement, like Scherzer. Lester is a known quantity, which vaults him over most of the replacements and I don't see them getting one for a better price (including trading prospects) than what Lester would have been willing to sign in ST. 
 
EDIT: Obviously, as an outsider looking in, it's impossible to say that they don't actually have a solid plan but looking over the FA options going into next season and what's on the trade market right now, extending Lester still seems like the best choice. 

 

[Bob Montgomerys Helmet Hat]

I'd agree if I thought there was a serious chance they went into next season without a real Lester replacement, like Scherzer. Lester is a known quantity, which vaults him over most of the replacements and I don't see them getting one for a better price (including trading prospects) than what Lester would have been willing to sign in ST. 

They're not going to not sign Lester so they can pay more for Scherzer.  If they don't sign Lester, it's because their organizational philosophy is that they aren't going to sign pitchers over 30 to 6+ year contracts at very high end money.  
Who was the last such pitcher that the Sox made a serious play for?

 

[MakMan44]

Both of you are correct. The FO has certainly shown they know what they're doing, and I overreacted when, as Pap points out, losing Lester doesn't mean they're not going to compete next season. 

 

[patinorange]

Mike Lowell, too, because Philly offered an extra year.

Oh shit, that one ended badly.

Somehow, they recovered. In fact, they went nuts on a spending spree shortly after that and recovered. They won a WS. If they sign Lester to long term market contract and he flames out, they will be fine.

I hope they do sign him.

 

[rundugrun]

4/$70m looks dumb in retrospect, but we have no idea if it was the best offer the FO made - and that seems highly doubtful.

According to Lester, the 4/70 is the only offer his agent received.

 

[HriniakPosterChild]

The price just goes up every fifth day.
 
(With apologies to Mo Vaughn. Hmm, that one ended not so badly.)

 

[O Captain! My Captain!]

Fangraphs ran a piece (here) about how Lester has benefited from Ross's pitch framing. Obviously it's always nice to get borderline calls, but Lester's use of the cutter both on the inside and outside corners of the plate seems to me like the perfect part of a pitcher's repertoire to disproportionately benefit from superior framing, and Lester and Ross have both mentioned in interviews about their good relationship with one another. With Ross (potentially coming back???) and Vasquez (drawing rave reviews from Lester's teammates), this may be a situation where Lester is worth more to the Sox than to their competitors, and where Lester may realize he can perform at his best, which is at least slightly encouraging for everyone who wants a deal to get done.
 
(The Yankees do have McCann, who is regarded as an excellent pitch-framer as well :smith: )

 

[maxotaur]

We didn't have a 'Lester' (in the sense you're implying) heading into last year either. It wasn't until after the break and into the playoffs that he started pitching like the guy he has been this year.

I'm all for resigning him and I'd be willing to go further than many maybe here - not because I ignore the risk or think it's a solid investment - but rather that I think with the way he payroll is lined up they am an afford it even if he blows his shoulder out halfway through.

But let's stop pretending that if they don't sign him or Scherzer that the chances of contention are suddenly zero. Lester walking away does not doom this franchise. It makes it less likely or more difficult, but it is not essential to them winning another WS.

I don't think anyone on this board is "pretending". You're right in that our chances of winning a WS is not zero without an ace. Sure, the Padres were given a better than zero chance by Vegas. I think the point made by most here is that it's greatly decreased. Not zero, no, but probably not very good.

and "Lester" may not have been "Lester" in the first half of last year. But we sure had "Lester" in the WS last year.

So your argument seems to be "we didn't have 'Lester' until we had 'Lester' so we didn't really need him after all". Would ya run that by me again?

 

[DeJesus Built My Hotrod]

Again, I hope I am incorrect - I really, really do (and I hope they are negotiating a good deal for both sides as we type/post).  However, he is very likely gone and as I said upthread, I think they knew this back when they made their initial proposal.    
 
Price equals information and the price the Sox were willing to start with suggested that they weren't serious bidders for his services.  The fact that he has gone out and pitched like a beast in his contract year doesn't change anything for them - they knew before that a guy with his track-record, stuff and durability was going to command a premium contract in terms of years and dollars.  The years are something they are not willing to swallow (and if they somehow offer him six years I will admit I am wrong here).   Whether or not this turns out to be an organizational short-coming is another story but its pretty clear that the tenor of these deals is what scares them the most.

 

[soxhop411]

Tim Britton with an excellent article on the tough decision to extend/not extend Lester
 

 
BOSTON — So, would you sign Jon Lester?
The will-they-or-won’t-they drama surrounding the Red Sox and Lester will continue to be the dominant theme of Boston’s second half, even if the Sox surge their way back into contention. Lester has been about as good as anybody in the American League  this season, and he’s making Boston pay for its low, initial offer in the spring.
 
But the Lester decision isn’t straightforward, no matter how you look at it. In determining whether to re-sign him and at what cost, the Red Sox have to wade through a pool of inconclusive historical data about pitchers’ aging process while attempting to pinpoint where their left-hander would fit on that curve.

http://www.providencejournal.com/sports/red-sox/content/20140719-decision-on-jon-lester-anything-but-straightforward-for-red-sox.ece

 

[Toe Nash]

We've discussed it in this thread but I'm not sure how helpful the other stories of pitchers are going forward, especially from the 90s. We've really come a long way in making sure pitchers aren't abused. I mean, just 10 years ago was the Dusty Baker / Prior / Wood fiasco, and doing something like that to your pitching would be pretty much unheard of now.
 
As an example mentioned by Britton, Jack McDowell threw 7 games with more than 130 pitches in 1995, his last good year. Lester has only two games with over 125 pitches in his career. That's supposed to be helpful?
 
Pitchers can break at any time but a lot of these guys had workloads that Lester has never approached. Even Sabathia had stretches where he went multiple starts on short rest. And Lester has a different frame than Sabathia and Santana (built like a twig), to say the least. I really think Lester's injury / performance risk needs to be evaluated on its own merits and from everything I know, it looks a lot better than most other guys.

 

[glennhoffmania]

There's also the issue of resources.  We aren't rooting for the Twins here.  If they're paying Lester $23m per year and at the end of the deal they're only getting $10m of value, the Sox can handle that.  If the Twins were paying Santana $98m for 5 wins they'd be pretty screwed.  So again, given the economics and the projected payroll going forward, they can take on this kind of risk more easily than almost any other team right now.

 

[Al Zarilla]

We've discussed it in this thread but I'm not sure how helpful the other stories of pitchers are going forward, especially from the 90s. We've really come a long way in making sure pitchers aren't abused. I mean, just 10 years ago was the Dusty Baker / Prior / Wood fiasco, and doing something like that to your pitching would be pretty much unheard of now.
 
As an example mentioned by Britton, Jack McDowell threw 7 games with more than 130 pitches in 1995, his last good year. Lester has only two games with over 125 pitches in his career. That's supposed to be helpful?
 
Pitchers can break at any time but a lot of these guys had workloads that Lester has never approached. Even Sabathia had stretches where he went multiple starts on short rest. And Lester has a different frame than Sabathia and Santana (built like a twig), to say the least. I really think Lester's injury / performance risk needs to be evaluated on its own merits and from everything I know, it looks a lot better than most other guys.

If Santana's built like a twig, I wish I was. Listed at 6', 210, and he always looked something like that to me. I was thinking about Lester's build too, and it is ideal for a pitcher. He's tall and strong all around, has been described as having tree-trunk legs, which are the foundation for any pitcher. His build and condition ought to be a good-sized plus. Well respected former pitching coach Farrell and current PC Nieves should also be able to manage him as well as any such combination in baseball. Still, looking at smaller guys, Maddux, Pedro, and currently guys like Hudson and Lincecum did/are doing fine as far as taking the ball every five days. 
 
Re-up Lester, please.
 
Johan Santana.
 

 

[JimD]

According to Lester, the 4/70 is the only offer his agent received.

 
Lester said in an interview last week that there were multiple discussions after the 4/$70 offer was put on the table - 'moving the money and years around' but both sides being unable to come to an agreement at the time.

 

[DavidTai]

I'd kinda like to see a link to that - I seem to recall posters here saying that the 4/70 was so insulting that they just didn't negotiate.

 

[soxhop411]

I'd kinda like to see a link to that - I seem to recall posters here saying that the 4/70 was so insulting that they just didn't negotiate.

 
I don’t think 'exploited' is the right word; they took a shot. They put the collective offer out there, that’s where they wanted to start off,” Lester said. “We had plenty of talks after that as far as money, moving years, moving money, but never got to another offer. Like I said, Opening Day came and went, and we put it on the back burner.”

http://www.boston.com/sports/baseball/redsox/extras/extra_bases/2014/07/lester_reportedly_thrown_off_by_red_sox_in-season.html

 

[DeJesus Built My Hotrod]

In today's blog post by Joshua Green, who wrote the original Henry Bloomberg piece back in March, he adds what he feels is a crucial quote that he omitted in the original article.
 

Here’s the unpublished passage I dug up from my notes, taken as Henry compared his trading strategy to baseball:
“The worse something felt, generally the more certain I was that I was right. The big trades we made money on, a lot of them didn’t make [outward] sense. The same thing is true in baseball: Fans often won’t like what turn out to be the best moves. If you’re a baseball fan and your [general manager] makes a trade that everybody loves, it’s probably not going to turn out well over the long term. It’s the same thing in trading: What looks good on the surface, below the surface often doesn’t look good.” 
 

 
Green's original post and this one are, imho, very informative (note that I am not Joshua nor do I know him.  Though I suspect he isn't a stranger to these parts) when trying to understand what Rudy often refers to as "The Plan".  I think The Plan is pretty simple - they are running a hybrid model that uses a bit of the Rays strategy (player development), a bit of the A's strategy (supplement using players whose skills are currently undervalued and can be had for shorter contracts) and, on occasion when they can lock up a player who is just entering their prime, a bit of the Yankees strategy.   To me, much as it bums me out, that leaves little room for Jon Lester to stay in Boston unless he accepts a shorter contract.  
 
The only question left is whether they can somehow agree on a higher AAV but shorter deal.  I can't see Lester's side agreeing to that but stranger things have happened.

 

[Rasputin]

In today's blog post by Joshua Green, who wrote the original Henry Bloomberg piece back in March, he adds what he feels is a crucial quote that he omitted in the original article.
 
 
Green's original post and this one are, imho, very informative (note that I am not Joshua nor do I know him.  Though I suspect he isn't a stranger to these parts) when trying to understand what Rudy often refers to as "The Plan".  I think The Plan is pretty simple - they are running a hybrid model that uses a bit of the Rays strategy (player development), a bit of the A's strategy (supplement using players whose skills are currently undervalued and can be had for shorter contracts) and, on occasion when they can lock up a player who is just entering their prime, a bit of the Yankees strategy.   To me, much as it bums me out, that leaves little room for Jon Lester to stay in Boston unless he accepts a shorter contract.  
 
The only question left is whether they can somehow agree on a higher AAV but shorter deal.  I can't see Lester's side agreeing to that but stranger things have happened.

 
I don't see how it says that at all. If you're using a little bit of the Yankees strategy, it means that when there are players who can be had for just money, and they're going to make a difference, you spend the money.
 
We have a great window with the kids to win before they get expensive. With Lester, we have a chane to win the World Series more than once in that window. We'll probably have a chance just about every year. Without Lester, our chances are a lot worse. All the costs is money. It comes at a time when we're building a roster with a lot of cheaper players.
 
Just sign the man.

 

[snowmanny]

Especially since there is no young Red Sox player entering their prime to lock up any time soon.

 

[DeJesus Built My Hotrod]

 
I don't see how it says that at all. If you're using a little bit of the Yankees strategy, it means that when there are players who can be had for just money, and they're going to make a difference, you spend the money.
 
We have a great window with the kids to win before they get expensive. With Lester, we have a chane to win the World Series more than once in that window. We'll probably have a chance just about every year. Without Lester, our chances are a lot worse. All the costs is money. It comes at a time when we're building a roster with a lot of cheaper players.
 
Just sign the man.

 
 
They aren't HSB.  That's what the initial offer was all about and the article is pretty telling as to why.  This pains me as much anyone else here because, I'd roll the dice on Lester.  Then again, these folks have, at the very least, earned some trust in that they know what they are doing.

 

[snowmanny]

If it's true he would have signed for 6\105 I am more pissed.

http://fullcount.weei.com/sports/boston/baseball/red-sox/2014/07/21/peter-gammons-on-dc-potential-trade-partners-show-most-interest-in-red-sox-reliever-andrew-miller/

 

[soxhop411]

If it's true he would have signed for 6\105 I am more pissed.

http://fullcount.weei.com/sports/boston/baseball/red-sox/2014/07/21/peter-gammons-on-dc-potential-trade-partners-show-most-interest-in-red-sox-reliever-andrew-miller/

I doubt that's true  thats 17.5 a year, which the Sox would do in a heartbeat