Red Sox starting pitching going forward

[Red(s)HawksFan]

I would imagine they'll hold off on Owens and Johnson until next year unless disaster strikes and they need a starter.  Neither are on the 40-man, and neither need to be added for Rule 5 protection purposes this winter.  No sense in rushing them and potentially causing a 40-man crunch unnecessarily.

 

[ivanvamp]

I would imagine they'll hold off on Owens and Johnson until next year unless disaster strikes and they need a starter.  Neither are on the 40-man, and neither need to be added for Rule 5 protection purposes this winter.  No sense in rushing them and potentially causing a 40-man crunch unnecessarily.

 
Fair point about the 40-man.

 

[shepard50]

 
Lester and Scherzer for $50M/season combined. Can you smell what Ben's cookin'?

 
This is what I am thinking….the plan. There is a pretty weak class of outfielders coming into FA this fall. But some great pitching. Free up 90M, shore up the outfield, and go get two or three frontline guys in the offseason.

 

[ivanvamp]

I would love, of course, to have both Scherzer and Lester.  But if they wouldn't pay Lester a little below market value back in March/April, why on earth do we believe that they would pay full market value *while Lester is a free agent*, PLUS sign Scherzer as well?

 

[E5 Yaz]

Hypothetical question:    If Angst Von Bucholz gets hit by a Boston "T" and killed do we get a compensation pick for him?

 
The T does

 

[shepard50]

I would love, of course, to have both Scherzer and Lester.  But if they wouldn't pay Lester a little below market value back in March/April, why on earth do we believe that they would pay full market value *while Lester is a free agent*, PLUS sign Scherzer as well?

 
Because the two months of this season are worthless and they turned that (and Gomes last two months) into Cespedes. A player at a position they could only improve through trade. If they can resign Lester in the offseason he is more valuable as they have already acquired the unaquirable for him.

 

[dcmissle]

 
Once they go west, it's hard to go back.

On the other hand, the o.co Coliseum is a penitentiary of a ballpark, and the ballclub is cheap as hell. There'll be no market offer coming from Oakland.
 

I'd keep Owens on hold until September callups

In the meantime, the rotation looks like

Buchholz
de la Rosa
Workman 
Ranaudo
Wright
... 
Profit (via temporary payroll reduction)

Ten or eleven starts each, many of which will not involve garbage time because of the closeness of the races.

Ben said in his PC that next 54 games are very important, and that he will look for answers from within, as well as offseason answers from without

So basically, it's their dream shot. Path made really clean by getting of competitors who also have presented distractions. We'll see who has the ability and maturity to take advantage of it.

 

[Harry Hooper]

I think Ben said Kelly is in the rotation, so not Wright.

 

[ivanvamp]

 
Because the two months of this season are worthless and they turned that (and Gomes last two months) into Cespedes. A player at a position they could only improve through trade. If they can resign Lester in the offseason he is more valuable as they have already acquired the unaquirable for him.

 
Well yes.  But why didn't they sign him earlier when they had no other teams bidding for his services?  I cannot believe that way back in March they thought, let's plan on trading Lester, get a good haul back, and then re-sign him.  They didn't sign him for a reason before the season started.  I think the evidence points to them not wanting to pay Lester what he was really worth on the market.
 
Well, now the market for him ensures that he'll be offered a lot MORE than what they could have had him for in the spring.  If the Sox felt that he wasn't worth the years or dollars (or both) that he was worth back in the spring, why would they suddenly feel he's worth the years and dollars he'll surely command in November?

 

[bosockboy]

I'm kind of seeing Kelly as the replacement for Doubront. Cost controlled 5th starter.

 

[shepard50]

 
Well yes.  But why didn't they sign him earlier when they had no other teams bidding for his services?  I cannot believe that way back in March they thought, let's plan on trading Lester, get a good haul back, and then re-sign him.  They didn't sign him for a reason before the season started.  I think the evidence points to them not wanting to pay Lester what he was really worth on the market.
 
Well, now the market for him ensures that he'll be offered a lot MORE than what they could have had him for in the spring.  If the Sox felt that he wasn't worth the years or dollars (or both) that he was worth back in the spring, why would they suddenly feel he's worth the years and dollars he'll surely command in November?

 
Because good strategy is emergent. As you said, there is no way they planned on trading Lester before the season with hopes to resign him. But given where they were after Tampa, and given Lester publicly saying he hope to come back in the offseason, and given the amount of salary they just cleared today, and given the weak FA outfield class etcetera etcetera.
 
I would think, as of today, signing Lester is more possible (and at higher AAV) than it was yesterday.

 

[ivanvamp]

 
Because good strategy is emergent. As you said, there is no way they planned on trading Lester before the season with hopes to resign him. But given where they were after Tampa, and given Lester publicly saying he hope to come back in the offseason, and given the amount of salary they just cleared today, and given the weak FA outfield class etcetera etcetera.
 
I would think, as of today, signing Lester is more possible (and at higher AAV) than it was yesterday.

 
I understand your point, and certainly changing circumstances often dictate a change in strategy.  However, if the FO believes that paying 30+ year old pitchers for those kinds of years and those kinds of dollars represents too great a risk (which is why they didn't sign him to that in the spring), then those guiding principles haven't changed any.  I mean, Lester is no less of a risk now because they traded him than he was when they had him.
 
In other words, signing him now would require a repudiation of one of their fundamental guiding principles (or so it would seem).

 

[Ananti]

 
I understand your point, and certainly changing circumstances often dictate a change in strategy.  However, if the FO believes that paying 30+ year old pitchers for those kinds of years and those kinds of dollars represents too great a risk (which is why they didn't sign him to that in the spring), then those guiding principles haven't changed any.  I mean, Lester is no less of a risk now because they traded him than he was when they had him.
 
In other words, signing him now would require a repudiation of one of their fundamental guiding principles (or so it would seem).

Not really, the fundamental guiding principle is "flexibility" and "adaptability".  Signing a player to a market value contract before you need to destroys your flexibility with that player.  That's what they gained by not signing him in the spring, they gained the ability to either trade him or not trade him come July.  

 

[Sprowl]

I'm kind of seeing Kelly as the replacement for Doubront. Cost controlled 5th starter.

 
Escobar and Rodriguez sound like the same, just pushed back a year or two. The pitching pipeline lacks for high-ceiling starters, aside from Owens, but depth it's got aplenty. Aces?
 
If the Red Sox are looking to compete in a big way in 2015 with all that salary space plus octane-fueled corner outfielders, then they should pursue both Lester and Scherzer.
 
For the other three starters, my money is on de la Rosa, Webster and Owens emerging (elite stuff), but I know nothing yet about the Escobar and Rodriguez acquisitions, and I haven't seen Ranaudo live yet. Friday is must-see ProspectTV.
 

 

[ivanvamp]

Not really, the fundamental guiding principle is "flexibility" and "adaptability".  Signing a player to a market value contract before you need to destroys your flexibility with that player.  That's what they gained by not signing him in the spring, they gained the ability to either trade him or not trade him come July.  

 
Is that the guiding principle?  I seem to recall reports coming out of Boston that the Sox would not spend the dollars and years for a pitcher in his 30's, because that represented a bad risk.  
 
But maybe I'm misremembering.

 

[bosockboy]

Escobar and Rodriguez sound like the same, just pushed back a year or two. The pitching pipeline lacks for high-ceiling starters, aside from Owens, but depth it's got aplenty. Aces?
 
If the Red Sox are looking to compete in a big way in 2015 with all that salary space plus octane-fueled corner outfielders, then they should pursue both Lester and Scherzer.
 
For the other three starters, my money is on de la Rosa, Webster and Owens emerging (elite stuff), but I know nothing yet about the Escobar and Rodriguez acquisitions, and I haven't seen Ranaudo live yet. Friday is must-see ProspectTV.
 

Well you'd assume Clay is the #3 after the two top tier starters they acquire. That leaves two slots for Rubby, Ranuado, Kelly, Owens and Escobar.

 

[Dan to Theo to Ben]

 
Escobar and Rodriguez sound like the same, just pushed back a year or two. The pitching pipeline lacks for high-ceiling starters, aside from Owens, but depth it's got aplenty. Aces?
 
If the Red Sox are looking to compete in a big way in 2015 with all that salary space plus octane-fueled corner outfielders, then they should pursue both Lester and Scherzer.
 
For the other three starters, my money is on de la Rosa, Webster and Owens emerging (elite stuff), but I know nothing yet about the Escobar and Rodriguez acquisitions, and I haven't seen Ranaudo live yet. Friday is must-see ProspectTV.
 

During the PC, Ben gave the impression that both EdRod and EE have good shots to be ML starters for us in the future.

 

[Ananti]

 
Is that the guiding principle?  I seem to recall reports coming out of Boston that the Sox would not spend the dollars and years for a pitcher in his 30's, because that represented a bad risk.  
 
But maybe I'm misremembering.

Because doing so destroys roster flexibility. You're confusing applying a principle in action to the principle itself.

 

[ivanvamp]

Because doing so destroys roster flexibility. You're confusing applying a principle in action to the principle itself.

 
So you think that the Sox' plan was to not sign Lester just so they'd have the hope of signing him in the offseason?  That makes no sense to me.  If they wanted him at a market price, they had the chance to get him without any competitors driving up the price.  I cannot believe they valued flexibility so much that they were willing to risk losing him, not knowing, really, what in the world they could get him for in a trade.
 
I understand what you are saying.  I don't think it applies here.  They have so many young (cheap!) guys coming up that they could easily have afforded Lester and still had plenty of flexibility.  

 

[geoduck no quahog]

Why not just take Cherrington at his word when he stated that both parties agreed not to discuss contract during the season (regardless of what people who have a stake in selling web hits said). Sox compete in 2014, they keep Lester, maybe add another pitcher at the deadline, and deal with him after the playoffs.
 
Sox tank in 2014? Trade 3 months of Lester for a bona fide return and deal with him after the playoffs.
 
Lester tanks in 2014? Deal with him after the playoffs.
 
The only alternative to that is Lester agreeing to a club-friendly offer before the 2014 season started.
 
Also, as I've said before, there is no way the Red Sox bow to the ridiculous mantra of "no long contracts over 30". They're a smart enough organization to take every case as an independent one. Not all elbows and shoulders are alike.

 

[Ananti]

 
So you think that the Sox' plan was to not sign Lester just so they'd have the hope of signing him in the offseason?  That makes no sense to me.  If they wanted him at a market price, they had the chance to get him without any competitors driving up the price.  I cannot believe they valued flexibility so much that they were willing to risk losing him, not knowing, really, what in the world they could get him for in a trade.
 
I understand what you are saying.  I don't think it applies here.  They have so many young (cheap!) guys coming up that they could easily have afforded Lester and still had plenty of flexibility.  

What you cannot believe, is exactly what they did.  

 

[ivanvamp]

What you cannot believe, is exactly what they did.  

 
Unless you are a member of the Sox' front office, you have no idea if this is true.
 
Well, it's true that they risked losing him, but it may not be true that it was for the reason you think.  It may be for the reason I think.

 

[benhogan]

Hypothetical question:    If Angst Von Bucholz gets hit by a Boston "T" and killed do we get a compensation pick for him?

No comp pick, but the Squirrels will be free...

 

[The Boomer]

Why not just take Cherrington at his word when he stated that both parties agreed not to discuss contract during the season (regardless of what people who have a stake in selling web hits said). Sox compete in 2014, they keep Lester, maybe add another pitcher at the deadline, and deal with him after the playoffs.
 
Sox tank in 2014? Trade 3 months of Lester for a bona fide return and deal with him after the playoffs.
 
Lester tanks in 2014? Deal with him after the playoffs.
 
The only alternative to that is Lester agreeing to a club-friendly offer before the 2014 season started.
 
Also, as I've said before, there is no way the Red Sox bow to the ridiculous mantra of "no long contracts over 30". They're a smart enough organization to take every case as an independent one. Not all elbows and shoulders are alike.

 
Nobody knows Lester's shoulder better than the Sox.  Whether they go beyond 4 years (probably their outside maximum) will tell us what we need to know.  Even the best pitchers inevitably decline.  The Sox didn't even want to be saddled with icon Pedro's end of career overpay.  Lefties can drop off a cliff suddenly.  Johann Santana anyone? Cliff (just dropped off a cliff tonight) Lee anyone?  Hamels for prospect surplus seems more reasonable.  The Sox would pay Lester a little more than for Hamels over that same duration to bring him back because he won't cost top prospects too.  Will the A's extend him a qualifying offer?  If so, the Sox would not lose their first round pick next winter since they were bad enough for this to be protected next year.  A contract comparable to and with a somewhat higher AAV than for Hamels will be as far as they will go.

 

[Kramerica Industries]

 
Nobody knows Lester's shoulder better than the Sox.  Whether they go beyond 4 years (probably their outside maximum) will tell us what we need to know.  Even the best pitchers inevitably decline.  The Sox didn't even want to be saddled with icon Pedro's end of career overpay.  Lefties can drop off a cliff suddenly.  Johann Santana anyone? Cliff (just dropped off a cliff tonight) Lee anyone?  Hamels for prospect surplus seems more reasonable.  The Sox would pay Lester a little more than for Hamels over that same duration to bring him back because he won't cost top prospects too.  Will the A's extend him a qualifying offer?  If so, the Sox would not lose their first round pick next winter since they were bad enough for this to be protected next year.  A contract comparable to and with a somewhat higher AAV than for Hamels will be as far as they will go.

 
A's cant offer a qualifying offer under the "new" CBA.
 
Its really not that new anymore.

 

[The Gray Eagle]

Our top of the rotation start for next year is pitching for some other team right now, and has a contract fhat runs out before 2019. Not sure who that is exactly. But we have like 10 pitching prospects now and loads of payroll space, so we should be able to package prospects for a top starter. I know Detroit's new acquisition only has one year left on his deal, I womder what it would take to get him in the offseason? ;-). Anyway the point is, look at top quality starters with 4 or less years on their contracts who might be available and you'll probably find our top starter for next year.

The A's are going to ride Lester like a rented mule as long as they have him (the mule used to be their symbol, didn't it?) He pitched a ton of innings last year too. I wouldn't be at all surprised if Lester has a bad year in 2015, after two years in a row of pennant race and postseason pitching. I still would take him back, but I think he will get huge money from someone else and have a disappointing 2015. But may still be a decent signing for whoever gets him.

 

[HriniakPosterChild]

 
Nobody knows Lester's shoulder better than the Sox.  Whether they go beyond 4 years (probably their outside maximum) will tell us what we need to know.  Even the best pitchers inevitably decline.  The Sox didn't even want to be saddled with icon Pedro's end of career overpay.  Lefties can drop off a cliff suddenly.  Johann Santana anyone? Cliff (just dropped off a cliff tonight) Lee anyone?  Hamels for prospect surplus seems more reasonable.  The Sox would pay Lester a little more than for Hamels over that same duration to bring him back because he won't cost top prospects too.  Will the A's extend him a qualifying offer?  If so, the Sox would not lose their first round pick next winter since they were bad enough for this to be protected next year.  A contract comparable to and with a somewhat higher AAV than for Hamels will be as far as they will go.

 
This is half true.
 
So can righties.

 

[chrisfont9]

 
Fair point about the 40-man.

Agreed, that has to seal their roster fate. Given all the incoming bodies, it's probably impossible from that standpoint.

 

[chrisfont9]

 
The Sox didn't even want to be saddled with icon Pedro's end of career overpay. 

I went to Pedro's B-Ref page to add a point here, but in the process I noticed that he once posted an ERA+ of 291 and completely forgot what I was going to say.

 

[Rasputin]

I went to Pedro's B-Ref page to add a point here, but in the process I noticed that he once posted an ERA+ of 291 and completely forgot what I was going to say.

 
His BBRef page is just insane. Over a period of eight years, he won the Cy Young three times, finished second twice, third once, and fourth once. Just insane. During that same stretch, his ERA+ was over 200 five times.
 
Anyway, I wanted to point out that the fine fellows at soxprospects.com did a thing for ESPNBoston on the stockpile of arms the Sox have after all the deadline deals.
http://espn.go.com/blog/boston/red-sox/post/_/id/39386/sox-have-stockpiled-impressive-arms

 

[DavidTai]

I was just looking up players outside of MLB who might be available in the offseason.
 
Kenta Maeda maybe? Apparently the Red Sox have already scouted him, per Nick Cafardo in May:  http://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/2014/05/17/pitching-injuries-have-become-big-problem/BQwm7yd5uhwTCSicgK9VrO/story.html

 

[Drek717]

 
So you think that the Sox' plan was to not sign Lester just so they'd have the hope of signing him in the offseason?  That makes no sense to me.  If they wanted him at a market price, they had the chance to get him without any competitors driving up the price.  I cannot believe they valued flexibility so much that they were willing to risk losing him, not knowing, really, what in the world they could get him for in a trade.
 
I understand what you are saying.  I don't think it applies here.  They have so many young (cheap!) guys coming up that they could easily have afforded Lester and still had plenty of flexibility.  

I don't think the intent was to not sign Lester, I think the intent was to work out an extension before the season started, but they let Lucchino be the point man and his whole "contested living" approach resulted in spoiling talks before they ever really got going with a 4/$70M.  At that point Lester made it clear he wasn't negotiating during the season unless they came 95% of the way to a market value deal, so Henry and Cherington wisely concluded that if they were going to pay market value it was better to keep their options open and make sure Lester didn't blow his elbow/shoulder apart, regress to 2012 Lester, etc. before doing so.  Turns out Lester was a horse while the rest of the team cratered, and a very interesting trade possibility emerged, worth taking on some extra risk with resigning Lester.
 
Once they had already gone down the road of paying at or close to full market value there was no point giving the deal early, and in the end it has paid off pretty well.  It'll pay off even more if they get Cespedes to a nice team friendly deal this winter, something like 3/$45M or so.

 

[LostinNJ]

They should think about a six-man rotation, if not now then in September. They need to protect these arms. They don't have anybody who's thrown 200 innings in a season, do they?

 

[Morgan's Magic Snowplow]

I don't think the intent was to not sign Lester, I think the intent was to work out an extension before the season started, but they let Lucchino be the point man and his whole "contested living" approach resulted in spoiling talks before they ever really got going with a 4/$70M.  At that point Lester made it clear he wasn't negotiating during the season unless they came 95% of the way to a market value deal, so Henry and Cherington wisely concluded that if they were going to pay market value it was better to keep their options open and make sure Lester didn't blow his elbow/shoulder apart, regress to 2012 Lester, etc. before doing so.  Turns out Lester was a horse while the rest of the team cratered, and a very interesting trade possibility emerged, worth taking on some extra risk with resigning Lester.
 
Once they had already gone down the road of paying at or close to full market value there was no point giving the deal early, and in the end it has paid off pretty well.  It'll pay off even more if they get Cespedes to a nice team friendly deal this winter, something like 3/$45M or so.

 
That seems like a reasonable narrative of events regarding Lester.
 
I do think, however, that people hoping to sign Cespedes to a friendly extension are going to be disappointed.  Everything really points to him wanting to hit FA and while Cherington recited the obligatory "We hope he's here a long time" line at the press conference, that's basically just cheap talk as he couldn't really say anything else at that point (ie,  "He's a one year rental to keep us competitive until we can find somebody better" or  "We're somewhat skeptical of him but will give him a shot and see what happens.").

 

[soxhop411]

ON MLBN 
 
David Ortiz "I have a very good feeling I'll be playing with Jon Lester again" via verducci on mlb network

 

[Buzzkill Pauley]

Great, now we're going to trade Ortiz to the MFY!?!?!?

 
I'm sure he meant the All-Star Game.

 

[dbn]

I honestly thought the "going forward" part of the thread title was referring to tomorrow, not 2015.

 
 

 
Once they go west, it's hard to go back.

On the other hand, the o.co Coliseum is a penitentiary of a ballpark, and the ballclub is cheap as hell. There'll be no market offer coming from Oakland.
 

I'd keep Owens on hold until September callups

In the meantime, the rotation looks like

Buchholz
de la Rosa
Workman 
Ranaudo
Wright
... 
Profit (via temporary payroll reduction)

 
Edes' espn blog:
 
• The Red Sox rotation, as presently constituted, includes Kelly, Clay Buchholz, Allen Webster,Brandon Workman and Rubby De La Rosa. It remains to be seen whether Ranaudo is here for more than one start.
 
If you had told me in April...

 

[Brianish]

ON MLBN 
 
David Ortiz "I have a very good feeling I'll be playing with Jon Lester again" via verducci on mlb network

 
If they actually do have the parameters of a deal worked out with Lester, they should all really, REALLY shut up about it. 

 

[BornToRun]

 
If they actually do have the parameters of a deal worked out with Lester, they should all really, REALLY shut up about it. 

That Ortiz quote gets me very excited though, regardless of whether it's a smart thing to say or not. Perhaps I'm just being overly hopeful, but I have a good feeling that #31 is back as our opening day starter next year.

 

[soxhop411]

From Lester's PC
 
Ryan Hannable ‏@RyanHannable  5m
Lester said he thanked the Red Sox organization yesterday for everything they've done & "we'll see where that relationship goes."
 
https://twitter.com/RyanHannable/status/495354636250152960

 

[Rasputin]

 
I'm sure he meant the All-Star Game.

 
I'm sure he meant he thinks Lester is going to be back.
 
 

Why?

If they discussed terms before they traded him, there's no tampering. He was their property.

Edit: I mean I don't think BC should come out and announce terms, but something like Ortiz's quote I don't think offers any danger. Beane wasn't trading for him with any desire or expectations to resign him either.

 
Because there are rules about talking about players under contract with other teams. If there is an agreement in place--and I don't for a minute believe that there is--then shutting the fuck up about it is the appropriate policy.

 

[Harry Hooper]

Ortiz was talking about Jon coming to Papi's charity golf tournament in the offseason.

 

[yecul]

All we know is that Lester was not willing to sign for a (ridiculously) deep discount and wants something around market. Maybe they get a small HT discount, maybe not, but it is to be around market. And, IMO, that means testing the waters to find out an appropriate mark, so he was hitting FA no matter what.

So what do you do, hang onto him and hope? Throw out an overpay to make him skip FA?

I like to think they made the trade with the intention of giving him a strong offer. And maybe there is an understanding that he will be interested in that. Rather, a belief on their part rather than an agreement. I think he turns down slightly less money to return. A crazy offer out of left field might compromise that.

Either you keep him, enter FA with your strong offer in hand hoping for the best or you trade him and enter FA with your strong offer in hand hoping for the best. I agree, it makes no sense to trade him.

 

[Bone Chips]

I was just looking up players outside of MLB who might be available in the offseason.
 
Kenta Maeda maybe? Apparently the Red Sox have already scouted him, per Nick Cafardo in May:  http://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/2014/05/17/pitching-injuries-have-become-big-problem/BQwm7yd5uhwTCSicgK9VrO/story.html

This.

 

[Rasputin]

For a big league debut, that was a heck of a game from Ranaudo.

 

[Yaz4Ever]

For a big league debut, that was a heck of a game from Ranaudo.

Couldn't agree more. Beltran is the only one who really had his number tonight.

 

[Buzzkill Pauley]

For a big league debut, that was a heck of a game from Ranaudo.

 
To be fair, it was only against the Yankees.
 
Seriously, though. Here's hoping he was just too amped-up to catch the feel for his curve.  That has the potential to be a really nice quality pitch if he can spot it for strikes.

 

[Tyrone Biggums]

For a big league debut, that was a heck of a game from Ranaudo.

Can't complain, a lot of young pitchers would have folded after Beltran homered. Good way to stop the losing streak. Now if only Buchholz found his way onto the DL...

 

[soxhop411]

Joon Lee ‏@iamjoonlee  5m
Ranaudo likely heading down to make room for Joe Kelly. #RedSox
 
https://twitter.com/iamjoonlee/status/495394648068984832
 
I would guess he will be back up in Sept

 

[Rasputin]

 
Joon Lee ‏@iamjoonlee  5m
Ranaudo likely heading down to make room for Joe Kelly. #RedSox
 
https://twitter.com/iamjoonlee/status/495394648068984832
 
I would guess he will be back up in Sept
 

 
So the rotation is going to be Buchholz, Kelly, Workman, de la Rosa, and who? Webster?