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).
Extending Lester
- Thread starter The Talented Allen Ripley
- Start date
- Status
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:
At any rate, I don't think saying, "We've agreed to put talks off" is necessarily inconsistent with, "...Of course, if they blow us away with an offer, we reserve the right to change out minds."
From a few days ago
While Lester may not want to negotiate until season's end, if the sox aren't totally posturing about their desire to retain Lester, they should put something in front of him that resembles a real market-based valuation.
bankshot1 said:
While Lester may not want to negotiate until season's end, if the sox aren't totally posturing about their desire to retain Lester, they should put something in front of him that resembles a real market-based valuation.
Jon Lester just completely rope a doped Henry and Larry.
Rather then get to the offseason and have them make a half hearted attempt to approach market value while claiming they want him back( With Ells it wasn't even half hearted but the scenario still loosely applies if they wait) Bradfo's leak essentially says Lester and his agent said lets expedite this bs and see if they do truly want me and if not trade me. ( I've said many a time on this thread JL's market value is hard to peg for a 30 year old lefty but one would assume its in the 140-150 million over 6 to 7 years based on Hamels Grienke Tanaka all who were younger when they signed)
I've been optimistic through all the leaks that the ownership would realize what they have in both resources and the type of player Lester is but now I'm not so sure.
As for the 1.5 bill valuation I have little doubt they could easily clear that if they sold the team which I wouldn't completely rule out but we shall see.
Rather then get to the offseason and have them make a half hearted attempt to approach market value while claiming they want him back( With Ells it wasn't even half hearted but the scenario still loosely applies if they wait) Bradfo's leak essentially says Lester and his agent said lets expedite this bs and see if they do truly want me and if not trade me. ( I've said many a time on this thread JL's market value is hard to peg for a 30 year old lefty but one would assume its in the 140-150 million over 6 to 7 years based on Hamels Grienke Tanaka all who were younger when they signed)
I've been optimistic through all the leaks that the ownership would realize what they have in both resources and the type of player Lester is but now I'm not so sure.
As for the 1.5 bill valuation I have little doubt they could easily clear that if they sold the team which I wouldn't completely rule out but we shall see.
glennhoffmania said:
No, I think not much. That e-mail is dexterous, almost too slick to hold. The Red Sox have "agreed" to hold off contract negotiations? Well, who are those in agreement? It suggests that somehow the impetus was Lester's -- but the reality is one of those deals where JWH can come back and say later, after the crash, that it was misinterpreted, and that the FO had agreed among themselves to agree to table things. In the words of a former Sox, he gone.
Again, offer him 5/125M right now with a 72 hour signing window. If he doesn't sign in that time, move him. If he does, even better.
P'tucket 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.
Yeah, the latest has caused me to shift. I think the signs are pointing to his departure.
Lots of chatter and declarative statements? Check.
Reported numbers far apart? Check.
Both sides trying to gain leverage? Check.
Messaging control under way? Check.
Etc...
1. I don't believe that Lester was taking a cheap deal this offseason. A 'hometown discount' of a couple % off market? Ok, but not more than that.
2. He would take a ~market deal. Duh. He won't be offered one by the Sox.
3. He will get market(+) offers elsewhere which he will accept.
Lester is gone. They know what he wants. They know they don't want to pay him that. A deal needs to happen.
Lots of chatter and declarative statements? Check.
Reported numbers far apart? Check.
Both sides trying to gain leverage? Check.
Messaging control under way? Check.
Etc...
1. I don't believe that Lester was taking a cheap deal this offseason. A 'hometown discount' of a couple % off market? Ok, but not more than that.
2. He would take a ~market deal. Duh. He won't be offered one by the Sox.
3. He will get market(+) offers elsewhere which he will accept.
Lester is gone. They know what he wants. They know they don't want to pay him that. A deal needs to happen.
Probably (gone)
nice going FO
but there's this from today's updated Boston Globe
http://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/2014/07/24/jon-lester-time-with-red-sox-could-nearing-end/qdmnH9VlUCbqMRgL2VeLpM/story.html
I hope he makes his start against Price in Tampa
The battle of the premier AL lefties who won't be pitching for their teams in '15
nice going FO
but there's this from today's updated Boston Globe
http://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/2014/07/24/jon-lester-time-with-red-sox-could-nearing-end/qdmnH9VlUCbqMRgL2VeLpM/story.html
I hope he makes his start against Price in Tampa
The battle of the premier AL lefties who won't be pitching for their teams in '15
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:
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.
The only time I had less confidence in the FO under this ownership group was when they hired Bobby V. What the fuck are they doing? How far apart can they possibly be that these guys would even notice the difference given how much money they're pulling in? There are certain players you reach for- Pedroia, Tek, Ortiz. Lester is in that group. You can't let him walk over an amount of money that, over the term of the deal, would be a footnote at best.
Yeah, I'm reading the "industry source" leak as a clear "The discount is off the table. If you want me to stay, pay me market rate." We're all assuming that's 6/150, but I'm not sure we can be certain that's what Lester's camp is asking for. We all ding his value a little for 2012 and a blip in 2013, but it's possible his agents are trying to sell him in the Scherzer range, where 6/140 was rejected. If Scherzer is expecting significantly more than that, Lester might be as well, and I wouldn't blame the Sox for balking at 6/165 or 7/189. Hell, as adamant as I've been about ponying up, I would start getting awful uncomfortable at anything exceeding 6/150. You have to draw the line somewhere, and I'm not convinced that 6/140 or even 6/150 is going to be what the market dictates Lester will get.
I'm holding on to a sliver of hope that the Red Sox still intend to negotiate, but they're delaying things because Lester holds all the cards right now. It must be beyond irksome for Henry to make deals from such a position of weakness.
Of course, aside from things we hope don't happen - an injury, or a string of bad starts - it's hard to see the situation changing in the Red Sox favor here. So only a sliver of hope. I have to agree he's probably gone.
Of course, aside from things we hope don't happen - an injury, or a string of bad starts - it's hard to see the situation changing in the Red Sox favor here. So only a sliver of hope. I have to agree he's probably gone.
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.
I wonder if something else is going on, other than not sending Lester a birthday card when he turns 31 next January.
Seems like all options are still on the table at this point. Trade Lester, make a pre-offseason offer to Lester, compete with other FA offers in the offseason.
Trade Pros: get talent now from desperate teams.
Trade Cons: season is certainly over, unlikely to resign Lester, less time to vet internal rotation options for next year. (Perhaps Lester will appreciate another chance to star in the post-season - who knows?)
Pre-offseason offer Pros - maybe get something of a discount on Lester, better idea of if we can flesh out the rotation with internal options or if we must big high on the FA market for a starter, season will likely be over for sure by the time you make the offer. If signed, Lester can "coast" and rest his harm after the signing if the season is lost.
Pre-offseason offer Cons: bidding against one's self? There seem to be no cons except the price going up.
Lester as a FA pros: Sox get a draft pick after Lester rejects what will be a Q.O., one way or another. Lester as FA cons: you get outbid for Lester or have to overpay Lester.
So that means Lester gets traded if a) the return will be greater than the possibility Lester resigning (mitigated by a draft pick). The relative need for Lester will be clearer as the season goes on and our AAA arms are called up. At this point it could be high.
I think we're still shooting in the dark on this. A lot depends on the Sox internal evaluation of their 2015 rotation pitchers, the value they expect Lester to command on the market, what sort of "discount" they think they'll see, and what next year's draft class and likely compensation pick will be.
Trade Pros: get talent now from desperate teams.
Trade Cons: season is certainly over, unlikely to resign Lester, less time to vet internal rotation options for next year. (Perhaps Lester will appreciate another chance to star in the post-season - who knows?)
Pre-offseason offer Pros - maybe get something of a discount on Lester, better idea of if we can flesh out the rotation with internal options or if we must big high on the FA market for a starter, season will likely be over for sure by the time you make the offer. If signed, Lester can "coast" and rest his harm after the signing if the season is lost.
Pre-offseason offer Cons: bidding against one's self? There seem to be no cons except the price going up.
Lester as a FA pros: Sox get a draft pick after Lester rejects what will be a Q.O., one way or another. Lester as FA cons: you get outbid for Lester or have to overpay Lester.
So that means Lester gets traded if a) the return will be greater than the possibility Lester resigning (mitigated by a draft pick). The relative need for Lester will be clearer as the season goes on and our AAA arms are called up. At this point it could be high.
I think we're still shooting in the dark on this. A lot depends on the Sox internal evaluation of their 2015 rotation pitchers, the value they expect Lester to command on the market, what sort of "discount" they think they'll see, and what next year's draft class and likely compensation pick will be.
Stitch01 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
There has never been any insinuation from Lester or his agents that he's been unhappy in Boston - or that he was insulted by the 70m offer. SO why would he not come back if they offered a competitive market value offer?
This is pretty simple from Lester's perspective .. he knows his value has increased this year and wants to test the market. It's perfectly reasonable to not want to talk contract during the season. If the Sox offer him 6/150 or thereabouts he will probably be back.
It's also pretty simple from the Sox (particularly Henry's) perspective - I don't think the Sox are interested in that kind of deal.
They will only trade him if all these apply:
a) they really believe the season is gone
b) they don't want to pay market value
c) they can get better than a comp pick
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.
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.
bankshot1 said:
THe FO is putting themselves in a very unenviable position assuming the team doesn't claw it's way into the postseason this year.
If they don't they'll be forced to look at how to improve a team with a desperate need for an impact bat and assuming they let Lester go a glaring hole at the front of the rotation and that's without even considering the Lackey contract that everyone seems to think they'll have to renegotiate. Both of those things cost big money on the market. And I'm sorry Justin Masterson can't hold Lester's jock.
If they want to say hey we're going with the young guys and we're confident they'll carry us through that's fine but the ticket prices are going to have to have to come down to match the small-market approach.
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.
nattysez said:
This is besides the point, but seriously? You loathe the front office that has brought us 3 titles in the last 10 seasons?
Seems like the Tigers would just pay Scherzer in that case.bankshot1 said:
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.
We can all hold out hope that he turns down more money/years and returns for 2015 and beyond, just like Mike Lowell did. No one will have wished he took the cash and ran at any point during the deal.
What are they doing? They don't to go big/long with a pitcher. Period. Lester is no exception.
Whether you agree with that approach or not is separate. This is their stance. I don't believe all public comments and believe that both sides - behind the scenes - have a good understanding what their respective demands are. He wants the 6 year contract for 22-25m per and he is right to ask it. They're likely sitting closer to 5/100.
Current odds he returns? I'd put it around 1:5 maybe up to 1:3. I would trade him.
What are they doing? They don't to go big/long with a pitcher. Period. Lester is no exception.
Whether you agree with that approach or not is separate. This is their stance. I don't believe all public comments and believe that both sides - behind the scenes - have a good understanding what their respective demands are. He wants the 6 year contract for 22-25m per and he is right to ask it. They're likely sitting closer to 5/100.
Current odds he returns? I'd put it around 1:5 maybe up to 1:3. I would trade him.
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:
Not that the counter-statements this morning had anything to do with actual numbers, anyways.
That was where I was going, but didn't want to seem too reactionary.
But it seems they're positioning the team with younger players, bringing down the player costs, taking less long-term risk, and maybe making the team more attractive to outsiders, just in case.
They're playing to full-houses, ticket prices are the highest in MLB, ad revs who knows, (I don't) but revenue growth outside of selling X, Holts, Vaz and Betts jerseys, is somewhat constrained.
Nah, too off the wall..
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:
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.
Snodgrass'Muff said:
I hate the way they do business. 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.
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:
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:
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:
nattysez said:
Like Ellsbury? Oh wait.
Red Sox were 4th in payroll in 2013 (153 million), the year after the Punto trade (when they were 172 million), and are 4th this year (162 million). WTF are you talking about?
Hiring Valentine was a colossal blunder. None of us have any way of knowing if it was a result of hubris. And it took them all of 1 year to fix their mistake.
We'll have to see how Lester's negotiations turn out. I'm not happy about the state of things either.
There's a team 250 miles to the south that has put in a copyright claim on "classy." You can always go root for them.
We have evidence that Lester said he wanted to stay in Boston was open to some kind of discount, turned down a 4/70, and we have Gammons saying he would have taken 6/105. Beyond that I don't know what we know.
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.
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.
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.
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 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:
Am I wrong to still consider the Red Sox a big market player in these proceedings?
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:
Rudy Pemberton said:
I believe the average pre-FA value of a draft pick in the 31-40 range is around 2 WAR. This article suggests that, with links to research along the same lines.
As you say, there's a good chance that value turns out to be zero--but by the same token, there's a non-trivial chance that it's considerably more than 2 wins. And if it is, you have hit the jackpot in terms of bang-for-buck.
It's sort of a nested gamble: if you don't trade Lester before the deadline you're assuming that either you can sign him or, failing that, you will get significant value out of the draft pick. If neither of these turns out to be true, you lose big. But trading him now means giving up your chance to win either half of the gamble. So to do that, I think you have to feel pretty sure that the first half of the gamble (signing Lester) is not possible. If it's strictly trade vs. draft pick, it probably shouldn't be that hard to come up with a trade that wins that contest. But if it's trade vs. deal-or-draft-pick, then that has to be a pretty good trade to look like the best option.
dcmissle said:
What happened under previous ownership is irrelevant. As for what's happened under the Henry era, I'm not convinced that there is a pattern there, at least not in so far as how the front office has handled things. There are incidents, of course. Tito was a big one. Of course, it also depends on what you mean by "handled poorly." Flat out smear campaigns have actually been pretty rare. Pedro, Damon and Ellsbury are probably the biggest names they've had walk in free agency and none of them were smeared. The front office made it known that they disagreed on the amount each player was worth going forward, whether that was in years, dollars or both, but I don't recall much in the way of smearing them. And anything that did come out was as much media driven as anything else which, until very recently, was not tied directly to the front office.
I mean, how many examples of someone from the front office making disparaging comments about players who were leaving can you really find? Is it enough to establish it as a pattern? It's one thing to say "Player X wanted Y amount of money over Z amount of years and we feel that a contract in that range is too risky." Or even "Player X was offered contract Y by team Z and we weren't given a chance to counter." Neither is a smear campaign, IMO. I also don't see anything about the Lester situation that I would consider actively a smear job or even set up for a smear job.
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:
ALiveH said:
Chicken and Beer is a great example of the media running with something and it then being blamed on the front office. I mean, most of the stories written cite "anonymous sources." The implication is that the front office leaked these stories, but I've yet to see a direct quote about it from someone in a position of any authority with the Red Sox. People may choose to connect the dots, but there's a difference between attributing anonymous quotes to the front office and knowing that the front office is putting out a PR hit on a player. The media in Boston has been doing this for far longer than John Henry has been around.
Edit: To clarify, I'm not saying the front office has absolutely never engaged in any of this behavior, just that it's far more complicated than some here seem to want to make it seem. Plus, when players leave, it hurts, and we look for someone to blame, which is understandable. Ownership and the front office are easy targets and sometimes they are even fully to blame. That said, they've maintained great relationships with plenty of former players. Pedro, Tek, Wake, Millar and Mike Lowell come immediately to mind as player who left and have returned to the club in retirement to make appearances or even work for the team or NESN.
In a perfect world, every parting of player and team would be quite, transparent and full of respect. In the real world, parting ways is often messy by its very nature.
- Status