After writing about the best free agents for each franchise in each league, Marbleheader decided he would torture himself, and us, by taking a trip down memory lane and write about the ten worst free agent contracts in Red Sox history.
I think he's a top 5 to this point personally. The free pass he's getting this year because he's smiling and not terrible at 1st (not clear that he's above average even) ought to go away once we have a losing streak and look at his crappy 1B .718 OPS (with a .351 BABIP as well). We need him to be a monster bat to be worth the contract, and there isn't much recent evidence aside from a ridiculous month and a half season in 2013 out of the past 5 years, that he can do that.Good read with most of the slots well-deserved. I don't see how a 1-year contract (Smoltz) could ever get in this kind of top 10, and Hanley doesn't even garner an honorable mention despite a historically bad 2015?
Just for reference; Dawson's contract in the modern context would have been something like 2 years / $70M. Not entirely apples-to-apples because only a limited number of teams were giving out large free agent contracts in the mid-1990s. But the point stands.No love for Andre Dawson?
$9.3 million, 2 year contract in 1993, making him the highest paid Red Sox and one of the best paid players in MLB. He was paid this much despite being 38 years old and in a state of obvious decline.
I agree. I also don't think Lackey should be on the dishonorable mention list. He had two fine seasons, clearly pitched hurt in a third season, and also pitched well in '14 before getting traded. The option year boosted his value, so while we can question the return Ben got for him I don't think that the contract itself was horrible.I don't see how a 1-year contract (Smoltz) could ever get in this kind of top 10
I hope this post isn't serious.I thought J.D. Drew could have been included as a Dishonorable.
He pitched six strong innings. The fact that he wasn't pulled when he was losing his stuff was not his fault.Mike Torrez belongs on the list because of one game.
Edit fixed spelling
Damnit, I should have thrown in a 'Why did we sign Jay Payton?' reference.No Jay Payton on the list??
He was the return in a trade for Josh Hancock, who would later kill himself when he crashed into a tow truck while drunk, speeding, and texting. His parents sued the tow truck operator and the guy whose car broke down. Quite a legacy.Good stuff. I'd like to see Jeremy Giambi added to the Honorable Mentions, just because by getting rid of him there was more room for Mr. Ortiz.
Yes, even with inflation in salaries making that not all that much these days, that was a real crap return for decent money at the time. People might forget about it because of the fact that he pretty much went away quickly.I agree. I also don't think Lackey should be on the dishonorable mention list. He had two fine seasons, clearly pitched hurt in a third season, and also pitched well in '14 before getting traded. The option year boosted his value, so while we can question the return Ben got for him I don't think that the contract itself was horrible.
How about Jenks? 2/12m, a total of 19 appearances all in 2011 with an ERA over 6.
I agree that the shot to the head wasn't the trigger that precipitated his poor second half, but he wasn't pitching all that badly leading up to that game. He was arguably pitching a bit over his head in the first half of that season (specifically May), garnering his only All Star nod, but there was nothing particularly steep about his slide post-All Star game. It was more a steady regression to his average self.As for Clement, the myth that he was pitching really well until he got clocked in the head really needs to die. His season was already sliding steeply when that happened.
Yeah, partly tongue in cheek. But SoSH certainly expended a great deal of electrons here moaning and groaning about under performance. Personally, I liked Drew and didn't get too wrapped up in the debate. But his across-the board numbers for the 5 years spent in Boston during his 13-year career were his lowest. I think most around here expected more 2008-like years. Especially at $14M/year. So no, maybe not worth a Dishonorable, but at least a passing mention - of frustration more than anything else.I hope this post isn't serious.
That's what generally happens in a guy's age 31-35 seasons. You sign over-30 FAs, you get decline phases. But the decline phase of a guy as good as Drew was still a very good player.Yeah, partly tongue in cheek. But SoSH certainly expended a great deal of electrons here moaning and groaning about under performance. Personally, I liked Drew and didn't get too wrapped up in the debate. But his across-the board numbers for the 5 years spent in Boston during his 13-year career were his lowest. I think most around here expected more 2008-like years. Especially at $14M/year. So no, maybe not worth a Dishonorable, but at least a passing mention - of frustration more than anything else.
Drew put up a 114 OPS + during his 5 years here, which includes his injury riddled, awful 2011 of 68. His WRC+ by year was 107, 142, 135, 110, and 67. Oh and in the playoffs he did this:
2007 ALDS: 364 OPS
2007 ALCS: 905 OPS
2007 WS: 878 OPS
2008 ALDS: 857 OPS
2008 ALCS: 796 OPS
2009 ALDS: 856 OPS
Dude was worth every penny of the $70M, and maybe more. He belongs nowhere near this list, or this discussion.
I can't and won't put up any argument against either of these observations. Like I said...I liked the guy. My point was just an observation that there are a slew of folks out there and on this board who feel otherwise, and was surprised that no one had already mentioned him, lightening rod for competing opinions as he was.That's what generally happens in a guy's age 31-35 seasons. You sign over-30 FAs, you get decline phases. But the decline phase of a guy as good as Drew was still a very good player.
He was also one of those guys who was a talking point for the pro and anti advanced stats people. His traditional numbers were kind of blah for the time period, but his rate numbers were very good. OPS, k%, BB%, iso, WAR were all pretty impresive in 08 and 09. But if you expected 30 HRs and 100 RBI, and a .300 batting average, this guy was pretty disappointing to you, even in his good years. Also, Youk smashed stuff and screamed all the time like a big baby, and Drew looked like he had taken half a bottle of Ambien and then sleepwalked into the batters box. Obviously one cared and the other didn't, etc.That's what generally happens in a guy's age 31-35 seasons. You sign over-30 FAs, you get decline phases. But the decline phase of a guy as good as Drew was still a very good player.
I would argue that folks OUTSIDE this board thought otherwise, but point takenI can't and won't put up any argument against either of these observations. Like I said...I liked the guy. My point was just an observation that there are a slew of folks out there and on this board who feel otherwise, and was surprised that no one had already mentioned him, lightening rod for competing opinions as he was.
Good observation. Our communal affection for Lowell and gratitude for his contribution to 2007 make it easy to forget what a ghastly little contract that turned out to be. $37.5M for 2.4 BBref wins.What about Mike Lowell? Does he count since he was a resign, but stiil a free agent at the time?
He was also one of those guys who was a talking point for the pro and anti advanced stats people. His traditional numbers were kind of blah for the time period, but his rate numbers were very good. OPS, k%, BB%, iso, WAR were all pretty impresive in 08 and 09. But if you expected 30 HRs and 100 RBI, and a .300 batting average, this guy was pretty disappointing to you, even in his good years. Also, Youk smashed stuff and screamed all the time like a big baby, and Drew looked like he had taken half a bottle of Ambien and then sleepwalked into the batters box. Obviously one cared and the other didn't, etc.
Also from that same offseason, same category: Curt Schilling.What about Mike Lowell? Does he count since he was a resign, but stiil a free agent at the time?
Different offseason, same category - Jerry Remy after his 1981 season. After years of the Sox turning up their noses at their own free agents, they decided that this was the guy they needed to bring back. He then produced at WAR of 1.2 over the next three seasons, with OPS+ stats of 79, 72 and 58.Also from that same offseason, same category: Curt Schilling.
I was a big Darwin fan, so I am going to chime in here.Danny Darwin. Unlike Smoltz, Darwin's contract was 4 years long. He had one good year, but was otherwise a disappointment. Just not nearly as bad as the other two. At least he could throw to first base: Matt Young could not.
It was $8M of the remaining $26M, plus $3M if his 2009 team option was declined (which it was). Renteria was a panicked sell-low dump and like you say, he netted a top prospect (even if the prospect flamed out). His signing is made a lot worse by the fact that they dumped him after a year. Had they held on to him, there's a fair chance the contract works out well enough to not warrant inclusion on a list like this.I don't remember how much cash the Sox had to throw in, but Edgar Renteria was traded for a top 10 prospect in baseball even after his failed year. His contract couldn't have been THAT bad.