I think the 5/100 is in addition to his current 2014 salary, so essentially he'd be signed through 2019 on a 6-year, $113M contract.
Extending Lester
- Thread starter The Talented Allen Ripley
- Start date
- Status
Now I realize that Gary Tanguay isn't exactly....well, anyone credible, but the assertion in the link below that Lester's version of a hometown discount is $25 mm per year is somewhat interesting.
http://www.csnne.com/blog/red-sox-talk/tanguay-lester-will-be-ace-wire-wire
If that "word" is true (and there's obviousuly no sourcing in that story), it makes me think that Lester's agents and the union have affected his thinking, at least somewhat.
I didn't see anything on this anywhere else this morning but perhaps those in the Boston market have seen or heard about it.
http://www.csnne.com/blog/red-sox-talk/tanguay-lester-will-be-ace-wire-wire
If that "word" is true (and there's obviousuly no sourcing in that story), it makes me think that Lester's agents and the union have affected his thinking, at least somewhat.
I didn't see anything on this anywhere else this morning but perhaps those in the Boston market have seen or heard about it.
True enough. Even out of market fans know that Tanguay is a joke. Still, this is one of those times when I wanted to see if I was missing something by not being in the NE market.
Lester did an interview with Dan Roche and mentioned different levels of home town discount. I've only heard a little bits of it on the radio but Lester mentioned guys like Verlander and Kershaw taken discounts to stay with their team.TheoShmeo said:
That's where the $25M is probably coming from. Toucher and Rich were throwing around that number based on the interview as well.
http://boston.cbslocal.com/video/9875812-sports-final-dan-roches-1-on-1-with-red-sox-jon-lester-part-1/
Given that Lester is neither as young (Kershaw) nor as good as good (Verlander) as those two, I have a hard time imagining that his agent could make the case that he should get $25 in a neutral context, much less as a "discount." Considering that we have him for this year already, I would hope that the team would back off extension talks if that were the actual ask (not saying that it is). Make him an offer of the 5/100 (so 6/113 counting this year), and tell him that he has until Opening Day to accept it, let him balance the risk of getting hurt or having a bad year, if he has no actual intention of taking a discount. There is no way that he is getting $25/yr even as a free agent, so the Sox don't have much to lose by holding firm.
In that interview he throws out the number $23m, I can't imagine that is an accident. Sounds to me like that is his ask.
I would imagine he thinks his value is $25m and he is starting at $23m. Since he looks at it as a discount he likely won't have as much give in that number as in a typical negotiation where you start at a number above what you think you should get.
I would imagine he thinks his value is $25m and he is starting at $23m. Since he looks at it as a discount he likely won't have as much give in that number as in a typical negotiation where you start at a number above what you think you should get.
Nick Cafardo @nickcafardo 30s
The Red Sox and Jon Lester 's agents have already engaged in at least two conversations concerning an extension for the lefty
https://twitter.com/nickcafardo/status/439916948890341376
The Red Sox and Jon Lester 's agents have already engaged in at least two conversations concerning an extension for the lefty
https://twitter.com/nickcafardo/status/439916948890341376
My gut feeling is not to give Lester even $20 mil per year. I would offer Lester $16.5 for 5 or 6 years each which is a little above Napoli. Lester is not an everyday player and had shaky spells in parts of 3 seasons before the eventual triumph in 2013. I would keep a lid on percentage of payroll per player to retain flexibility on down the road. Of course, i say this in light of the fact that the Red Sox have a fine stable of young arms on the rise in the minors. Lester can eventually be replaced even though it is easier said than done, but it is someone's job to find or develop him. Every player is paid to win the WS so when one does why should you double his salary from $13 mil?
With Al due respect you can stop reading now
I would make my offer based on years and not so much money per year because there are 24 other valuable players to pay. This way you maintain some control of the risk of a long term contract to a mature starting pitcher.
I would make my offer based on years and not so much money per year because there are 24 other valuable players to pay. This way you maintain some control of the risk of a long term contract to a mature starting pitcher.
First off who is Al?Papi's fan said:
Secondly the RedSox don't get to set the market, the market is set by whatever team is willing to pay the most for the player.
There will be a team willing to pay much more than what you are saying you would offer so as was already stated why even bother with an offer so far below market?
I honestly have no idea why I bothered.
Hriniak, I'm not saying I would not have signed Pedro to that deal because circumstances dictate acquisitions. Al ? posted just before my second post and it was evidently deleted. The reason I would make an offer is
because Lester stated he would take a hometown discount and of course because he deserves an offer based on his performance in the final third of the season and the playoffs.The Red Sox front office will manage the
risk they take with Lester's salary and I would not be surprised at a $20 million dollar salary for Lester due to the market, but to me the market is inflated at various times and this is a high tide.
My position from following baseball for over 50 years is that at this point in time my favorite team is in a unique position to set their own market for Lester and if he doesn't take it well thanks Jon. The Sox got good value
during his tenure. The future is unpredictable, but a contract salary won't be and their are perhaps better values waiting in the wings that might help produce more trips to the World Series. I believe the Sox can make it
back to the WS without Jon while eventually spreading his appropriated salary to younger players. I'm also still a big fan of Jon Lester, but following the leader like the Yankees with now outlandish outlays for one player
is not necessarily wise right now.
I also may be a bit of a contrarian, but I have enjoyed my choices in life. This is one risk I would take.
because Lester stated he would take a hometown discount and of course because he deserves an offer based on his performance in the final third of the season and the playoffs.The Red Sox front office will manage the
risk they take with Lester's salary and I would not be surprised at a $20 million dollar salary for Lester due to the market, but to me the market is inflated at various times and this is a high tide.
My position from following baseball for over 50 years is that at this point in time my favorite team is in a unique position to set their own market for Lester and if he doesn't take it well thanks Jon. The Sox got good value
during his tenure. The future is unpredictable, but a contract salary won't be and their are perhaps better values waiting in the wings that might help produce more trips to the World Series. I believe the Sox can make it
back to the WS without Jon while eventually spreading his appropriated salary to younger players. I'm also still a big fan of Jon Lester, but following the leader like the Yankees with now outlandish outlays for one player
is not necessarily wise right now.
I also may be a bit of a contrarian, but I have enjoyed my choices in life. This is one risk I would take.
Papi's fan said:
We haven't seem a low tide since 1975 - its done nothing but rise since FA began
Papi's fan said:
5/90 might have got this done in the honeymoon period after the World Series or in the beginning of the offseason, but 5/100 looks to be about the floor now after an offseason that saw the largest pitching contract in history handed out, 175 M paid to someone that hasn't thrown a pitch in the Major Leagues, and 110/5 just laid out to a fairly comparable arm. His current salary of 13 M is irrelevant, that contract was signed 5 years ago. The market has moved.
Lester may not be an ace and is no longer "young" in baseball terms, but the dude has been an absolute horse. He's averaged more than 205 regular season innings over the last six years. That durability alone is immensely valuable. And someone like Lester who can deliver above average innings, as he has proven, is even more valuable.
16.5 have strikes me as a pretty ridiculous lowball. it I think others are right on the money, if that is the valuation that the club places on Lester, it is probably best to not get involved rather than "offer" what you proposed.
Papi's fan said:
Outside of Lester's spot, this club will likely be looking for two homegrown players to step into the rotation over the next two years. That seems reasonable, given the wealth of talent that resides in the upper minors, though still ambitious with the unpredictability of pitching prospects. If Lester isn't part of the equation, we are talking about three spots. In my opinion we'd likely have to go to the FA market, and for anything but filler, the FA market is a model of inefficiency.
Developing young players that contribute is the best way to maintain flexibility. Signing players to hometown discounts is another way. Assigning an arbitrary 16 M cap on all players, not so sure...
I certainly respect everyone' s opinion, so I would prefer to retain Lester at any price, however, each and every salary impacts the other 24. I simply favor the strongest Red Sox team for the best value to retain the flexibility to improve.
Let's offer everyone $4m - $8m under their present market value, then, that oughta do the trick.
The Allented Mr Ripley said:
Signing a pitcher a year away from free agency for $4m less than he'd get as a FA isn't outrageous, especially when that pitcher also adds he's willing to take a hometown discount. Paying Lester as if he's a free agent now when we have him under control for a year doesn't make sense either. Players take discounts when they aren't free agents yet, and the discount should be greater for pitchers.
Pitchers are risky. If he goes out and has another year like he had in 2012 he's not going to get the money they think. It looks like the price of elite free agents is going up, but I'm not sure that's true of 2nd level guys. There's no guarantee that Lester will be seen as the best or second best FA pitcher a year from now with Scherzer, Shields, Masterson, Haren, and Josh Johnson all possible free agents.
Reverend said:
Sorry if I'm missing something but I took the post I was responding to as sarcasm because he thought the numbers some people were throwing out were way too low. I thought some discussion was more valuable than one liners. A Lester extension seems to be the key decision the team is facing right now, and a wrong move either way could have massive negative consequences for years.
Now I'm picturing you living under a tree.Papi's fan said:
I do get your overall point about tying up salary on one player, but I would argue that the team has a better chance of maintaining flexibility with a core of a couple of really good position players and a couple of really good starters that may need to be paid ~market rate and perform commensurately. It is easier to improvise building a team if you have that sort of foundation. I see Lester as a major building block going forward.
The team is in the best position to judge the weights they should apply to the highly variable performance blocks they saw in 2012 and 2013. If that was all random variation then paying Lester like a #1a starter seems like more risk than they're usually willing to take. However, if the late season resurgence was due to Farrell and Lester making affirmative changes that they expect to generate consistently sub3,50 ERAs for a few more years then they'll pay up gladly. We'll have to wait and see. Maybe if Lester thinks 20+ is a discount, then they prefer to see the first half this year and pay a little more later than make an educated guess now.
That may well be what Cherington does, but the risk is big annual pay at say 5 years. The Sox have appeared to have shied away from huge deals like this. If it works out without injury everyone will be happy, but so much can go wrong with a starting pitcher with wear. Some answers will come soon and if it's big money and years we'll get all the answers way down the road.snowmanny said:
Pete Abraham @PeteAbe 22s
Lester says he feels like progress being made in contract talks. #redsox
https://twitter.com/PeteAbe/status/447088734706868224
Lester says he feels like progress being made in contract talks. #redsox
https://twitter.com/PeteAbe/status/447088734706868224
That source would be Ben Cherington who said that during last night's broadcast.soxhop411 said:
Joel Sherman @Joelsherman1 16msoxhop411 said:
Also heard significant gap between what Lester wants long term and what #Redsox willing to do with Opening Day deadline looming
https://twitter.com/Joelsherman1/status/447146114782097408
conflicting reports again
Peter Gammons @pgammo 1m
Whille Lester takes high road, nothing right now indicates anything is remotely close in his extension negotiations
https://twitter.com/pgammo/status/447152949937311744
2:37pm: Lester says that he and the Red Sox have made progress on an extension but are "not in the red zone," tweets Brian MacPherson of the Providence Journal. Scott Lauber of the Boston Herald adds that Lester is willing to continue negotiating into the season if the two sides can reach the "five-yard line" prior to Opening Day (Twitter link). WEEI.com's Rob Bradford spoke with a team source who feels that both Lester and Ortiz will have new contracts prior to Opening Day, though nothing is imminent with Lester. (MLBTR)
So, Lester would take 6-$140, but I'd probably be starting at an offer of 5-$95, and maybe willing to do 6-$112. Seems like there's still a big gap. Do you go 7-$122.5 to lower the AAV and make him a lifetime Red Sox in order to get more at the total value of what he wants?
Just because he would take 6/140 doesn't mean that's what he's looking for. I think he must realize that, especially being a year away from FA, he isn't going to get top dollar.Plympton91 said:
I would be happy to hear of an extension in any of these ranges, including near the offer that Scherzer just declined.
Lester is an excellent dependable starter, and if he leaves they need an equivalent.
The risk is that they sign him and he gets hurt, sure: if someone can figure out how to eliminate risk with pitchers let us know. But if he's not signed, then the choices are:
1. Hope for one of the prospects to replace him. This would be great, but the odds are basically against it. Plus they have to replace Lackey in the next couple years as well.
2. Sign a Free Agent. I personally do not see how this is an advantage. Now the Red Sox are forced to out-bid everyone on
someone else rather than a contract at or under market rate with Lester. This might be Scherzer at 7/180 or Masterson at 5/100. I would prefer Lester at 6/135 to either of those hypothetical contracts.
3. Trade the farm. Despite our fond memories of trading Hanley Ramirez and Anibal Sanchez for a title, I would prefer keeping the prospects. In fact, I think signing Lester decreases the chances they would feel compelled to trade off their cost-controlled talent for a replacement and therefore might well save them money in the long-term.
Lester is an excellent dependable starter, and if he leaves they need an equivalent.
The risk is that they sign him and he gets hurt, sure: if someone can figure out how to eliminate risk with pitchers let us know. But if he's not signed, then the choices are:
1. Hope for one of the prospects to replace him. This would be great, but the odds are basically against it. Plus they have to replace Lackey in the next couple years as well.
2. Sign a Free Agent. I personally do not see how this is an advantage. Now the Red Sox are forced to out-bid everyone on
someone else rather than a contract at or under market rate with Lester. This might be Scherzer at 7/180 or Masterson at 5/100. I would prefer Lester at 6/135 to either of those hypothetical contracts.
3. Trade the farm. Despite our fond memories of trading Hanley Ramirez and Anibal Sanchez for a title, I would prefer keeping the prospects. In fact, I think signing Lester decreases the chances they would feel compelled to trade off their cost-controlled talent for a replacement and therefore might well save them money in the long-term.
Lester's not coming off a CYA, hasn't won one, and is a half year older than Scherzer. Scherzer might be a comp, but he's not a great one.
IMO, Lester falls between Garza and Scherzer, which makes the 5 yr/$100M level deal we've previously discussed seem about right on years and $. I'd like him at that amount to anchor a staff that should turn younger and less experienced soon. But I wouldn't go apeshit and throw silly money at him. 6/$144 would be silly, imo.
IMO, Lester falls between Garza and Scherzer, which makes the 5 yr/$100M level deal we've previously discussed seem about right on years and $. I'd like him at that amount to anchor a staff that should turn younger and less experienced soon. But I wouldn't go apeshit and throw silly money at him. 6/$144 would be silly, imo.
I have been one who has been very critical of Lester over the last couple years, repeatedly stating he lacks the command or stuff necessary to be an ace, and is a reliable #2, and criticizing his stubbornness and lack of approach to his craft.
I think he did more than prove me wrong in October, I think he really matured as a pitcher overall during the course of the season, and proved pretty clearly that he is an exceptional pitcher and is on the right track under the current coaching staff to remain that way for a long time.
His primary area of improvement was his demonstrated command, and pitching in Fenway, taking away a handful of poorly located mistakes a game makes a huge difference.
He isn't going to fool anybody into thinking he is Cliff Lee, King Felix, Verlander, etc, but I think given the current economics is reasonably expected to perform as a very good pitcher each of the next five or six seasons.
Given the continued direction of finances, I think something in between but not including 5/100 and 6/150 is reasonable, and at the lower end of that range he is likely to actually earn it, and at the higher end he is likely to at least stay healthy enough to have a chance or not be a huge overpay.
Given his age, inherent pitcher risk, and the Red Sox recent tendency to go up in dollars instead of years, I wouldn't be surprised to see it come in at 5/115 and have us happy with that number now, and pretty likely to be happy with that number when it expires in October 2019, and likely to retain him at that point at whatever the market bears for a very wealthy pitcher beginning his decline phase and wanting to be a Red Sox for life.
I think he did more than prove me wrong in October, I think he really matured as a pitcher overall during the course of the season, and proved pretty clearly that he is an exceptional pitcher and is on the right track under the current coaching staff to remain that way for a long time.
His primary area of improvement was his demonstrated command, and pitching in Fenway, taking away a handful of poorly located mistakes a game makes a huge difference.
He isn't going to fool anybody into thinking he is Cliff Lee, King Felix, Verlander, etc, but I think given the current economics is reasonably expected to perform as a very good pitcher each of the next five or six seasons.
Given the continued direction of finances, I think something in between but not including 5/100 and 6/150 is reasonable, and at the lower end of that range he is likely to actually earn it, and at the higher end he is likely to at least stay healthy enough to have a chance or not be a huge overpay.
Given his age, inherent pitcher risk, and the Red Sox recent tendency to go up in dollars instead of years, I wouldn't be surprised to see it come in at 5/115 and have us happy with that number now, and pretty likely to be happy with that number when it expires in October 2019, and likely to retain him at that point at whatever the market bears for a very wealthy pitcher beginning his decline phase and wanting to be a Red Sox for life.
With it looking like Scherzer might be on the market next year, who would you rather have, Scherzer or Lester?. Assuming of course the Red Sox can't have both.
Scherzer has only had one elite year, but that was last year. Lester has not been elite for an entire season since 2010, although he certainly was elite the last 2 months of last year and in the post season (elite being arbitrarily defined as an ERA+ of 130 or more).
Scherzer has only had one elite year, but that was last year. Lester has not been elite for an entire season since 2010, although he certainly was elite the last 2 months of last year and in the post season (elite being arbitrarily defined as an ERA+ of 130 or more).
Considering what Scherzer has already turned down, one would expect his free agent contract to be pretty sizable, to say the least.
Yeah you've been beating this drum about Lester for awhile. I'd take Lester. In my opinion, between the two of them Scherzer has the best single season, but Lester has five seasons better than Scherzer's second-best. This includes last year, where Lester had a brief bad stretch, but finished 19-9 3.45 1.25WHIP and was getting stronger.Sampo Gida said:
Nick Cafardo @nickcafardo 13m
"We're going to hit the pause button," Ben Cherington on Jon Lester talks. hoped talks could resume but could also table to end of season
https://twitter.com/nickcafardo/status/449918238160584704
"We're going to hit the pause button," Ben Cherington on Jon Lester talks. hoped talks could resume but could also table to end of season
https://twitter.com/nickcafardo/status/449918238160584704
Sampo Gida said:
I would rather have Scherzer.
Jon Lester:
2012 ERA+ 87
2013 ERA+ 109
Max Scherzer:
2012 ERA+ 114
2013 ERA+ 145
Scherzer has less wear and tear on his arm. I don’t see Lester as a 20 million dollar per year starting pitcher. I think the Red Sox should wait and get another year of data on Lester and Scherzer before making a decision. While Scherzer will cost more money than Lester, the larger investment might be more prudent than paying Lester 20 million per year. Based on his last two regular seasons, Lester’s value is more in line with around 15 million per year. I wouldn’t offer him more than that at this point.
Good news IMO.
Let's see how the season plays out before signing Lester to an extension. Gotta figure the Sox are reluctant to go multiple years at big bucks. That's how they got into trouble under Theo.
Let's see how the season plays out before signing Lester to an extension. Gotta figure the Sox are reluctant to go multiple years at big bucks. That's how they got into trouble under Theo.
FanSinceBoggs said:
Well, by picking 2012 and 2013 as data points you are ignoring Lester's four previous seasons in which his ERA+ was 144,136,134 and 122. And by
posting his REGULAR SEASON ERA+ for 2013 you are choosing to throw out data (data which obviously improves his numbers) for no particular reason. I think 2012 was an aberration unlikely to repeated given that 2012 was an unusual year for the team in many respects, but if you think that his 2012 season is more in line with what we can expect from him going forward than what we saw in August(edit)/ September/October 2013 (edit:and in fact the entirety of the rest of his career) I can see why you wouldn't want him. As for the "wear and tear" on his arm, if you are against giving a multi-year contract to a pitcher who has made 31+ starts six straight years then I am guessing you are going to be against ever giving a multi-year contract to any pitcher. Finally, $15,000,000 is so laughably below Lester's market value that offering him that contract would be an insult to Lester, his agent and the intelligence of Red Sox fans.
There's going to be a lot of money next year, and a lot of that money will go to the FA pitchers. Lester will easily exceed $20M/yr, quite possibly $25M, on the open market, barring any disasters befalling him in 2014. That's the reality of the market. Whether the Sox should participate at that market rate for Lester is an interesting discussion, but there is no chance Lester would accept anything less than $20M, never mind $15M.
- Status