PDA

View Full Version : Update: Lester extension talks stall



grandsalami
01-23-2014, 06:25 PM
Boston Red Sox ‏redsox 1h
.@jlester31 media session before tonights Writers Dinner. "I want to stay here. I've grown up in this organization." pic.twitter.com/WM6f1wIP4d

Boston Red Sox ‏redsox 1h
Lester: "Since we left Boston all my son's talked about is going home to Boston. This is our home. This is what I've known.

Sean McAdam ‏@sean_McAdam 1h
Lester on contract extension: "They know I don't want to go anywhere & hopefully we can sit down in spring training & iron some stuff out."

Brian MacPherson ‏@brianmacp 56m
Lester isn't using Kershaw as a bar in any way: "That one in itself is off on its own."

Scott Lauber ‏@scottlauber 43m
Lester on staying with #RedSox: "These guys are my No. 1 priority. I want to be here until they have to rip this jersey off my back.

Sean McAdam ‏@sean_McAdam 44m
Lester acknowledged extension will mean leaving some $ on table, but added: "You don't want to be the guy that makes that market come down.'

Gordon Edes ‏@gordonedes 37m
Lester says he not only expects he will have to take a discount to stay, he's willing to do so''

Scott Lauber ‏@scottlauber 37m
Lester: "I want to win. If it means taking a Pedroia deal where you stay for less money to be happy and win every year, let's do it" #RedSox

Scott Lauber ‏@scottlauber 28m
More from Lester on possible extension: "I understand you're going to take a discount to stay. Do I want to do that? Absolutely." #RedSox

homie564
01-23-2014, 06:48 PM
Hopefully this gets something done quickly. Could be awesome news if we get him for under 20M

BoSox47
01-23-2014, 06:56 PM
Lester is awesome glad pedey set the example and lester is backing him with it. Great players taking less is huge able to spread the wealth to keep winning.

Walligans
01-23-2014, 07:23 PM
I'd have to see Lester pitch some more first. He's been so inconsistent the last three years that I'd want to make sure we were getting 2013 second half Lester and not September 2011-June 2013 Lester.

-Lavigne43-
01-23-2014, 08:15 PM
He's going to make a ton whether it's a discount or not. Giving any pitcher as much as he will get makes me nervous, but I would be shocked if something isn't done during spring training/early April.

BostonBoy
01-23-2014, 08:16 PM
I'd have to see Lester pitch some more first. He's been so inconsistent the last three years that I'd want to make sure we were getting 2013 second half Lester and not September 2011-June 2013 Lester.

Pretty sure that was just a bad stretch for him caused by locker room plagues. When you really look at his statistics, the end of 2011 and all of 2012 is an outlier. Even if he does post close to a 4 ERA, he's going to give you 200+ innings, an ERA+ of around 120, and he has a very clear track record of being dominant in the post-season. Not extending him would be a huge mistake. There's nothing more to see -- everyone knows what he is.

theGhost-isGone
01-23-2014, 09:23 PM
I'd have to see Lester pitch some more first. He's been so inconsistent the last three years that I'd want to make sure we were getting 2013 second half Lester and not September 2011-June 2013 Lester.

Tbh I'm through hearing about Lester being inconsistent. He battled his way through cancer, and during that time he had remarkable stretches including one no-no. Now that he's with Farrell again i see him being better than the 3 years of "inconsistency" he battled through while the organization was going through some FO issues. I'm not saying he'll be a top 5 SP, but he's our best bet at the top of the rotation going forward.

Walligans
01-23-2014, 09:29 PM
I'm not willing to ignore 2011 and 2012 because of team chemistry issues. Even when Lester pitched well down the stretch last year, he had unsustainable home run rates.

BostonSports96
01-23-2014, 09:36 PM
6 years, $100-110 mill would be great team deal for him to take.

bagwell368
01-23-2014, 09:52 PM
I'd have to see Lester pitch some more first. He's been so inconsistent the last three years that I'd want to make sure we were getting 2013 second half Lester and not September 2011-June 2013 Lester.

Lester did poorly with Salty (see dozens of prior posts for citations). Salty is gone. Lester had I believe four different pitching coaches in four years. Did fine with the first and fourth. The first is his Manager, the fourth is his returning coach.

Going into the season to watch a pitcher who had a fine 2nd half and a brilliant playoff isn't going to verify anything that can't be seen half way through ST.

Pay the man.

Walligans
01-23-2014, 10:28 PM
Lester did poorly with Salty (see dozens of prior posts for citations). Salty is gone. Lester had I believe four different pitching coaches in four years. Did fine with the first and fourth. The first is his Manager, the fourth is his returning coach.

Going into the season to watch a pitcher who had a fine 2nd half and a brilliant playoff isn't going to verify anything that can't be seen half way through ST.

Pay the man.

Lester struggled with Farrell at the beginning of last year. He had more success in the second half, but there isn't a pitcher in baseball that has sustained the kind of home run rates that he had in the second half. It would be a shame to overpay him based on 3 months of a good ERA.

corky831
01-23-2014, 10:51 PM
Lester has been one of the top 15 pitchers I'd say since 2008 based off of consistency. He's left handed and has shown to dominant in the playoffs. He had a bad 2012. Big deal. Cliff Lee was so bad one yr they sent him to the minors and he has been a beast ever since. Lester probably would put up similar numbers to Kershaw if he pitched in the NL....definitely a sub 3 era. He deserves the money and should be paid.

bagwell368
01-23-2014, 10:55 PM
I believe since the start of 2008 Lester is in the top 12 for SP rWAR. Lester is also one of the few SP's that has continually gone out and started 30+ games a year. But, being on the Sox he has been about as carefully handled as any SP of his time. His velocity at his current age seems to be holding up vs his peak speed when he was younger compared to the small handful of top SP's of this era I've checked the past year or two.

I won't bore with the details, but mechanically Lester is very clean I.E. He's going to age well.

Walligans
01-23-2014, 10:59 PM
I believe since the start of 2008 Lester is in the top 12 for SP rWAR. Lester is also one of the few SP's that has continually gone out and started 30+ games a year. But, being on the Sox he has been about as carefully handled as any SP of his time. His velocity at his current age seems to be holding up vs his peak speed when he was younger compared to the small handful of top SP's of this era I've checked the past year or two.

I won't bore with the details, but mechanically Lester is very clean I.E. He's going to age well.

Could you please expand on how his mechanics will help him to age well? I think this is an area where you could draw on your coaching experience to provide insight that the typical poster lacks.

todu82
01-24-2014, 01:16 AM
Hope this happens. Lester should be treated as 1 of our better players and should stick with the team long term.

theGhost-isGone
01-24-2014, 01:16 AM
Lester has been one of the top 15 pitchers I'd say since 2008 based off of consistency. He's left handed and has shown to dominant in the playoffs. He had a bad 2012. Big deal. Cliff Lee was so bad one yr they sent him to the minors and he has been a beast ever since. Lester probably would put up similar numbers to Kershaw if he pitched in the NL....definitely a sub 3 era. He deserves the money and should be paid.

I agree he deserves the respect of retiring a member of the BRS organization. I don't understand, however, the fascination with a LHP in Fenway. I know not all RHH are pull hitters, but given the fact that the green monster does allow righties a monstrous (c what i did ther) advantage for baBIP, doubles, HRs and OBP I'd be stacking RHP on my rotation.

I understand not every game Lester starts is in Fenway, and i don't even know what his home/road splits look like, i would just be mindful of his velocity and the movement and control of his cutter going forward.

penuch
01-24-2014, 04:11 AM
Could you please expand on how his mechanics will help him to age well? I think this is an area where you could draw on your coaching experience to provide insight that the typical poster lacks.

There's a couple things that work well in his favor.

He uses his whole body to pitch. Some pitchers use their legs and lower half very poorly causing more stress on the shoulder.

He has a very smooth throwing motion. There's nothing herky jerky about his motion which a lot of power guys tend to have. The smoothness will lead to him also having less stress on his shoulder.

Lester repeats his motion extremely well. So he is not constantly trying to mess with his arm angle nor does he have to overthrow (think peavy) to make up for missing his spots.

Those are just a couple of examples.

bagwell368
01-24-2014, 10:30 AM
Could you please expand on how his mechanics will help him to age well? I think this is an area where you could draw on your coaching experience to provide insight that the typical poster lacks.

Pitchers that have correct mechanics use their legs properly (stride length, push off strength/timing), throw within the same arm slot, do not have an over emphasized arm whip or wrist snap, etc.). The cleaner the motion the faster the pitch (lets not talk knuckleballs), the less effort a pitcher has to to put into every pitch and the less damage is done to the all parts of the body connected to pitching - which all things being equal/considered will result in a longer time able to pitch at ML quality levels.

Having good mechanics vs bad mechanics won't help the fact that pitching velocity decreases with age. It won't help a pitcher if he lets his body go and/or doesn't follow a good regime as spelled out by his pitching coach. It's not a cure all. But Lester along with the fact he's almost the perfect height and weight for a pitcher in this era, has a clean low effort delivery assures he's got a better chance than most pitchers of his age do to continue on an be productive during most or all of his next contract.

bagwell368
01-24-2014, 10:37 AM
I agree he deserves the respect of retiring a member of the BRS organization. I don't understand, however, the fascination with a LHP in Fenway. I know not all RHH are pull hitters, but given the fact that the green monster does allow righties a monstrous (c what i did ther) advantage for baBIP, doubles, HRs and OBP I'd be stacking RHP on my rotation.

I understand not every game Lester starts is in Fenway, and i don't even know what his home/road splits look like, i would just be mindful of his velocity and the movement and control of his cutter going forward.

Fenway is not a good HR park. It's a great doubles park - and OBP park due to the least amount of foul territory in the Majors.

LHP that refuse/fear to pitch inside n Fenway to RHH get killed. Lester comes inside well and generates a lot of fouls for doing so.

Lesters splits are quite even road/home. The Yanks among other teams are heavily LHH. A top LHP on his game tends to dominate top LHH line-ups than top RHP dominate RHH line-ups over time - for the simple fact that RHH see a lot of RHP but LHH see less LHP.

bagwell368
01-24-2014, 10:39 AM
There's a couple things that work well in his favor.

He uses his whole body to pitch. Some pitchers use their legs and lower half very poorly causing more stress on the shoulder.

He has a very smooth throwing motion. There's nothing herky jerky about his motion which a lot of power guys tend to have. The smoothness will lead to him also having less stress on his shoulder.

Lester repeats his motion extremely well. So he is not constantly trying to mess with his arm angle nor does he have to overthrow (think peavy) to make up for missing his spots.

Those are just a couple of examples.

Good job. Sometimes it's an advantage to actually have played the game and watch it being played.

Walligans
01-24-2014, 12:23 PM
I'd give Lester 5 years/$80 million. I don't think he's as bad as he looked in 2012 and I don't think he's as good as he looked in the second half of 2013.

bagwell368
01-24-2014, 01:11 PM
I'd give Lester 5 years/$80 million. I don't think he's as bad as he looked in 2012 and I don't think he's as good as he looked in the second half of 2013.

Interesting. Let's look at the underlying numbers.

1. Two of Lester's comps are Beckett and Lackey.

Lackey signed for 5/$82.5M (16.5 per)
Beckett extended for 4/$68M (17 per)

Both were older than Lester if he signs anytime in the next year. Beckett had a problematic season in terms of health and performance prior to signing his extension. Lackey missed starts (GS: 24 & 27) in both years prior to signing here (after 5 years straight of 33 or 32 starts).

In Lester's last 5 seasons, he's earned $20.08M per in FG WAR $.
In Beckett's prior 5 seasons to his extension he earned $16.88 in FG WAR $.
In Lackey's prior 5 seasons to his deal here he earned $17.04 in FG WAR $.

The Sox budget in 2009 was $121.7M. It appears the budget this year will be $181.725M*. If we ignore the rise in premium SP contracts and just say that Lester should have the same or very similar percentage of the teams budget as Lackey and Beckett, then 5/$80M sees quite low.

Now if the Sox trade Carp ($1.4M) it will cover the minimum cost of Sizemore. However there is no way the Red Sox can extend Lester before the season w/o moving a serious contract such as Peavy.

(http://bostonherald.com/sports/red_sox_mlb/clubhouse_insider/2014/01/money_matters_an_updated_look_at_red_sox_2014_payr oll)

The Union and Lesters agent don't seem liable to support Lester in signing that sort of deal.

Walligans
01-24-2014, 01:47 PM
The Sox budget in 2009 was $121.7M. It appears the budget this year will be $181.725M*. If we ignore the rise in premium SP contracts and just say that Lester should have the same or very similar percentage of the teams budget as Lackey and Beckett, then 5/$80M sees quite low.

This seems like a very odd way to try to calculate what Lester is worth. I doubt Lester cares what portion of the team budget his contract occupies. I simply averaged his WAR $ values the last three years and got $17.1. I realize that includes one of his worse years, but he's also going to be in his age 30 season next year and he's saying he's willing to take a discount. If he's willing to take a discount, 5 years/$80 million seems reasonable to me.


Now if the Sox trade Carp ($1.4M) it will cover the minimum cost of Sizemore. However there is no way the Red Sox can extend Lester before the season w/o moving a serious contract such as Peavy.

(http://bostonherald.com/sports/red_sox_mlb/clubhouse_insider/2014/01/money_matters_an_updated_look_at_red_sox_2014_payr oll)

The Union and Lesters agent don't seem liable to support Lester in signing that sort of deal.

If the Red Sox are going to extend Lester, they will most likely do so after the beginning of the season so it won't affect this year's salary at all. That's how they've operated in the past, and it makes the most sense given their current salary.

bagwell368
01-24-2014, 02:41 PM
This seems like a very odd way to try to calculate what Lester is worth. I doubt Lester cares what portion of the team budget his contract occupies.

From a GM POV Lesters relative percent and total of the teams budget is crucial. How could it be not be so? It's data. He's got the data of the recent high buck SP contract as well. Your statement that you would offer him 5/$80M must be either from the GM or fan POV, and not Lesters belief of his own value. You said what you'd offer him, not what Lester would consider a good contract after all.


I simply averaged his WAR $ values the last three years and got $17.1. I realize that includes one of his worse years, but he's also going to be in his age 30 season next year and he's saying he's willing to take a discount. If he's willing to take a discount, 5 years/$80 million seems reasonable to me.

No note taken of rising contract prices for top end SP's? Don't you think Hamels is a reasonable comp for Lester? He's the same age. He's done a bit better, but w/o facing the DH regularly as well. He's also got a bit more mileage. He got 5/$112.5M ($22.5M) w/ a makeable $24M option in year 6. Do you suggest Lester is only worth 71.1% of Hamels per season? That's well beyond a discount assuming nothing dramatic on the health front.

Walligans
01-24-2014, 03:00 PM
From a GM POV Lesters relative percent and total of the teams budget is crucial. How could it be not be so? It's data. He's got the data of the recent high buck SP contract as well. Your statement that you would offer him 5/$80M must be either from the GM or fan POV, and not Lesters belief of his own value. You said what you'd offer him, not what Lester would consider a good contract after all.

I must not be understanding you correctly. From a GM/owner perspective, why would it be an issue that Lester's contract doesn't take up a larger portion of the team's budget?


The Sox budget in 2009 was $121.7M. It appears the budget this year will be $181.725M*. If we ignore the rise in premium SP contracts and just say that Lester should have the same or very similar percentage of the teams budget as Lackey and Beckett, then 5/$80M sees quite low.


No note taken of rising contract prices for top end SP's? Don't you think Hamels is a reasonable comp for Lester? He's the same age. He's done a bit better, but w/o facing the DH regularly as well. He's also got a bit more mileage. He got 5/$112.5M ($22.5M) w/ a makeable $24M option in year 6. Do you suggest Lester is only worth 71.1% of Hamels per season? That's well beyond a discount assuming nothing dramatic on the health front.

WAR $ scales with the contracts given out, so it does take inflation in to account. By virtually all measures (WAR, ERA-, FIP-, xFIP-) Lester's not as good as Hamels and he's said he's willing to take a discount. Those metrics are park and league adjusted, so they take the lack of a DH in to account.

EDIT: Here are the numbers to back it up.

2011-2013
Lester - 651 IP, 13.2 WAR, 82 ERA-, 83 FIP-, 84 xFIP-, 3.26 SIERA
Hamels - 610 IP, 10.9 WAR, 95 ERA-, 91 FIP-, 93 xFIP-, 3.84 SIERA

Hamels was also a year younger when he got his extension and this sample size includes 2013 which was a down year for him that happened after he got his extension. If we looked at the last three years before the extensions, the difference would be even greater.

Hopefully we can spare the whole "if you expand the sample size to this and then take out this year and that year and put an extra emphasis on this or that month" routine and just agree that Hamels is the better pitcher. But I have a feeling that won't happen.

bagwell368
01-24-2014, 06:56 PM
....

What Lester means by discount isn't known. Basing your predictions of what contract he might sign or mean seems highly speculative at this point.

I also said that Hamels was a reasonable comp for Lester - not better or as good. Why you exploded into some 3 year comp fest - I have no idea. I wish for your sake you had saved your valuable time.

Using career stats Lester and Hamels are indeed fairly close. Lester is 96.1% as valuable per rWAR by innings. Certainly as I said, Lester is worth more than 70.1% of Hamels contract. That's the yearly difference if Lester signs for the $16M you project. Using the 96.1% number Lester is worth $21.625M per if Hamels is worth $22.5M.

Walligans
01-24-2014, 07:42 PM
What Lester means by discount isn't known. Basing your predictions of what contract he might sign or mean seems highly speculative at this point.

I also said that Hamels was a reasonable comp for Lester - not better or as good. Why you exploded into some 3 year comp fest - I have no idea. I wish for your sake you had saved your valuable time.

Using career stats Lester and Hamels are indeed fairly close. Lester is 96.1% as valuable per rWAR by innings. Certainly as I said, Lester is worth more than 70.1% of Hamels contract. That's the yearly difference if Lester signs for the $16M you project. Using the 96.1% number Lester is worth $21.625M per if Hamels is worth $22.5M.

:clap:

Thank you.

This isn't arbitration, players don't get contracts scaled to their career numbers. Lately, Lester's WAR suggests he's been roughly 82% as valuable as Hamels (13.2 WAR vs. 10.9 over the last three years). He's also a year older than Hamels was and he's saying he's willing to take a discount. 70.1% of Hamels contract seems a lot more reasonable than 96.1%. It's also slightly below Lester's WAR $, which is probably a much better comp for him than Hamels. If Ben Cherington starts using Ruben Amaro Jr. contracts as comps, then we're in trouble.

bagwell368
01-24-2014, 11:06 PM
This isn't arbitration, players don't get contracts scaled to their career numbers. Lately, Lester's WAR suggests he's been roughly 82% as valuable as Hamels (13.2 WAR vs. 10.9 over the last three years). He's also a year older than Hamels was and he's saying he's willing to take a discount. 70.1% of Hamels contract seems a lot more reasonable than 96.1%. It's also slightly below Lester's WAR $, which is probably a much better comp for him than Hamels. If Ben Cherington starts using Ruben Amaro Jr. contracts as comps, then we're in trouble.

There are a number of ways to measure players. 1 year, 3 year, 5 year, and career values. Old Prospectus measures like STF, measurements BC uses that we are not privy too, subjective factors such as "playoff and WS hero". Not sure why you think there is only way to measure Lester's worth - unless your projections can only work with one set of data looked at in one way.

As I demonstrated earlier he was more qualified than Lackey and Beckett when they got their contracts looking back over the prior 5 years of their careers, and they both got paid over $16M per when the BRS budget was less than it is now.

Also as I said and you can't deny - you have no idea what "discount" means since it wasn't defined, and any tentative value you put on what that means is just that - tentative. If Lester signs here IMO it will be for more than $16M per. If he signs elsewhere it would seem to for $20M or more per.

Walligans
01-24-2014, 11:29 PM
If we're going to look for comps for Lester, I don't think it gets much better than Anibal Sanchez. His contract was fairly recent (2013), he was a year younger at the time and unlike Hamels he has similar career numbers and recent performance (and his GM's not crazy).

Career
Sanchez - 86 ERA-, 86 FIP-, 94 xFIP-, 3.90 SIERA
Lester - 86 ERA-, 85 FIP-, 89 xFIP-, 3.83 SIERA

3 years prior to contract
Sanchez - 11.5 WAR, 92 ERA-, 85 FIP-, 92 xFIP-, 3.67 SIERA
Lester - 10.9 WAR, 95 ERA-, 91 FIP-, 93 xFIP-, 3.84 SIERA

And Sanchez got the same 5 year/$80 million deal I'm proposing for Lester. You could give some more weight to intangibles like Lester's postseason performance, but Lester did also say that he'd be willing to take a discount and he is a year older. So overall that very even comp and Lester's WAR $ (which looks at all player values) seem to suggest that 5 years/$80 million would be a pretty fair offer for Lester, especially if he's willing to take a discount.

ciaban
01-26-2014, 01:11 PM
Hopefully this gets something done quickly. Could be awesome news if we get him for under 20M
That sounds extremely unlikely, and even if his AAV is under 20 it will probably be 19.5+

If he is willing to take a discount, he will get somewhere between Matt Cain and Cole Hamels contracts, they all have been pretty similar to him up to this point in their careers.

Those two got 6 year deals with an AAV of 21 million and 24 million. I think that's what he will get off the market.

Lester is awesome glad pedey set the example and lester is backing him with it. Great players taking less is huge able to spread the wealth to keep winning.

I don't think Lesters feeling are at all affected by Pedroia taking less.

ciaban
01-26-2014, 01:22 PM
Duplicate.

Walligans
01-26-2014, 01:36 PM
That sounds extremely unlikely, and even if his AAV is under 20 it will probably be 19.5+

If he is willing to take a discount, he will get somewhere between Matt Cain and Cole Hamels contracts, they all have been pretty similar to him up to this point in their careers.

Those two got 6 year deals with an AAV of 21 million and 24 million. I think that's what he will get off the market.


I don't think Lesters feeling are at all affected by Pedroia taking less.

Hamels isn't a good comp. Lester hasn't been similar to him statistically over the last few years, plus he's older and Ruben Amaro Jr. is crazy so I wouldn't use his contracts as a bench mark.

2011-2013
Lester - 10.9 WAR, 95 ERA-, 91 FIP-, 93 xFIP-, 3.84 SIERA
Hamels -13.2 WAR, 82 ERA-, 83 FIP-, 84 xFIP-, 3.26 SIERA

Cain is also a bad comp. He was more similar statistically, but he was four years younger than Lester. There's a big difference between extending a pitcher at age 26 and extending a pitcher at age 30. Pre-discount Lester should not be making as much money as Hamels or Cain. Anibal Sanchez still remains a remarkably similar comp, and he got 5/$80 million.

bagwell368
01-27-2014, 12:50 PM
If we're going to look for comps for Lester, I don't think it gets much better than Anibal Sanchez. His contract was fairly recent (2013), he was a year younger at the time and unlike Hamels he has similar career numbers and recent performance (and his GM's not crazy).

Career
Sanchez - 86 ERA-, 86 FIP-, 94 xFIP-, 3.90 SIERA
Lester - 86 ERA-, 85 FIP-, 89 xFIP-, 3.83 SIERA

3 years prior to contract
Sanchez - 11.5 WAR, 92 ERA-, 85 FIP-, 92 xFIP-, 3.67 SIERA
Lester - 10.9 WAR, 95 ERA-, 91 FIP-, 93 xFIP-, 3.84 SIERA

And Sanchez got the same 5 year/$80 million deal I'm proposing for Lester. You could give some more weight to intangibles like Lester's postseason performance, but Lester did also say that he'd be willing to take a discount and he is a year older. So overall that very even comp and Lester's WAR $ (which looks at all player values) seem to suggest that 5 years/$80 million would be a pretty fair offer for Lester, especially if he's willing to take a discount.

Sanchez has never pitched more than 196.1 innings.

Lesters IP since 2008:

210
203
208
191
205
213

Lester has 4 seasons at or over 4.4 rWAR. Sanchez has 1 over 3.8.

Also Lester had 4 seasons at/over 124 ERA+ (124, 134, 136, 144) -- (IP: 191, 208, 203, 210)
Sanchez has 1 season over 117 ERA+ (163) (IP: 182)

Take out Sanchez's complete outlier season and his ERA+ is 111. Lester's outlier is 2012 - all his other years are ERA+ 100 plus. Sanchez has two seasons with a sub 100 ERA+.

Sorry, he's not a comp for Lester by the numbers, never mind by the eye.

filihok
01-27-2014, 01:30 PM
Sanchez ... only pitched 74.2 in 2012.

That's not true. He threw 195.7 innings in 2012.




Sanchez' 3 seasons prior to signing his contract
95 starts, 587 IP, 92 ERA-, 11.5 fWAR, 8.5 RA-9 WAR = average of 10.0

Sanchez reached free agency then re-signed with Detroit.

Lester's last 3 seasons
97 starts, 610 IP, 95 ERA-, 10.9 fWAR, 9.9 RA-9 WAR = average of 10.4

Lester's extension would also be free agent years

*http://www.fangraphs.com/leaders.aspx?pos=all&stats=pit&lg=all&qual=0&type=c,7,8,13,14,-1,121,120,-1,47,48,49,-1,45,62,61,122,-1,59,212,117&season=2012&month=0&season1=2010&ind=0&team=0&rost=0&age=0&filter=&players=4930,3284


For the 3 seasons preceding their possible contracts, Sanchez looks like a very good comp for Lester. Lester's camp probably will not argue that, however.

bagwell368
01-27-2014, 01:33 PM
That sounds extremely unlikely, and even if his AAV is under 20 it will probably be 19.5+

If he is willing to take a discount, he will get somewhere between Matt Cain and Cole Hamels contracts, they all have been pretty similar to him up to this point in their careers.

Those two got 6 year deals with an AAV of 21 million and 24 million. I think that's what he will get off the market.


I don't think Lesters feeling are at all affected by Pedroia taking less.

Good post. For a few weeks now $22.5 per seems like the number to me. They can give a bonus, a 6th year w/ a Sox choice buy-out. But I hope the core is 5/112.5 signed after opening day '14.

snick4444
01-27-2014, 03:36 PM
5 year, 110 million. 6th year team option

2014- 24 mil
2015- 22 mil
2016- 22 mil
2017- 22 mil
2018- 20 mil
2019- 20 mil (team option) 4 mil buyout

money seems about right with a team friendly structure.

bagwell368
01-28-2014, 10:38 AM
That's not true. He threw 195.7 innings in 2012.

True, that's what happens when you look at seasons broken out by teams.


Sanchez' 3 seasons prior to signing his contract
95 starts, 587 IP, 92 ERA-, 11.5 fWAR, 8.5 RA-9 WAR = average of 10.0

Sanchez reached free agency then re-signed with Detroit.

Lester's last 3 seasons
97 starts, 610 IP, 95 ERA-, 10.9 fWAR, 9.9 RA-9 WAR = average of 10.4

Lester's extension would also be free agent years

*http://www.fangraphs.com/leaders.aspx?pos=all&stats=pit&lg=all&qual=0&type=c,7,8,13,14,-1,121,120,-1,47,48,49,-1,45,62,61,122,-1,59,212,117&season=2012&month=0&season1=2010&ind=0&team=0&rost=0&age=0&filter=&players=4930,3284


For the 3 seasons preceding their possible contracts, Sanchez looks like a very good comp for Lester. Lester's camp probably will not argue that, however.

Lester gets slightly deeper into his starts, he has also averaged 32.3 starts per since 2008, Sanchez has only neared that his last 4 seasons (31 GS/season).

While the raw slash against is very close:

JL: .250/.320/.383

AS: .251/.318/.379

Lester's home park is more difficult than AS's has been. Lester hasn't faced the DH in 13 starts (5.9%) in his career. AS has faced them 33 times (19%) in his. I don't have time to check, but I believe in addition to that Lester has faced tougher line-ups outside of those factors as well.

Sanchez is only a comp with the gigantic outlier 2013 included in his numbers. Take away that outlier and he's fading to: 256/.325/.389. Take away Lesters outlier 2012, and the difference will be even greater

Unlike regular season metrics, post season performance is a large factor for a team that expects to be battling for a post season berth.

While Sanchez has been quite good in his post season: ERA: 2.95 K/BB: 2.93 WHIP 1.337 IP: 36.2
Lester has topped AS in the post season with a better: ERA: 2.11 K/BB: 3.24 WHIP: 1.043 IP: 76.2

Lester is one of the better post season pitchers going. Better then Beckett, Lackey, Sanchez, etc. and into the category with Cain, Lincecum, and Hamels.

filihok
01-29-2014, 12:35 AM
Sanchez is only a comp with the gigantic outlier 2013 included in his numbers.
I didn't include Sanchez' 2013 in my comparison.
He still looked like a good comp.


Unlike regular season metrics, post season performance is a large factor for a team that expects to be battling for a post season berth.
A large factor for what?
Please provide evidence to support your answer.

bagwell368
01-29-2014, 07:21 AM
A large factor for what?
Please provide evidence to support your answer.

I miswrote the sentence: it should have read "In addition to regular season metrics, post season performance is a large factor for a team that expects to be battling for a post season berth." Also I'll add that other subjective factors play a role in the choice of signing/extending Lester and for what range the offer will fall in.

bagwell368
02-20-2014, 08:34 PM
And Sanchez got the same 5 year/$80 million deal I'm proposing for Lester.

Homer Bush is going to sign for it seems like: 6/$105M, you sure Lester is just worth 5/$80M?

Don't think so.

Station 13
02-21-2014, 12:32 AM
Lester with post season track record will be a $100M floor to sign him.

Boston-Born
02-21-2014, 11:34 AM
Homer Bush is going to sign for it seems like: 6/$105M, you sure Lester is just worth 5/$80M?

Don't think so.

Homer Bailey*

The only thing I disagree with here is that Jon is 3+ years older than Homer with more wear and tear on his arm. I do think its a good benchmark but I don't think it now means Jon will be a 7/140 type deal or anything because of this.

bagwell368
02-21-2014, 02:09 PM
Homer Bailey*

The only thing I disagree with here is that Jon is 3+ years older than Homer with more wear and tear on his arm. I do think its a good benchmark but I don't think it now means Jon will be a 7/140 type deal or anything because of this.

Lester is 2 years and 4 months older than Bailey. Lester has been a bull since he became a starter. Lester is head and shoulders over Bailey in the regular season (3rd, 45h, 5th, 9th, 24th best rWAR in the AL in his best 5 years) and a giant in the post season.

Bailey career wise has a below average ERA+ of 96. Bailey has managed 25th and 21st in the NL in his best two seasons. According to wiki "Being considered a "can't miss prospect", Bailey's first 2 seasons with the Reds were seen as disappointing, and the 2009 season didn't start off much better." "Bailey made the Reds out of spring training in 2010. He ended up on the disabled list with shoulder inflammation in May." It should be noted that Lester has never had arm or shoulder issues severe enough to place him on the DL.

As I've been saying for months Lester should end up around $22.5M per. Adding that to his existing year would in effect make it a 6 year deal for $125.5M which seems to be in range. The notion that Lester would sign for 5/$82.5M needs to be given up. Even 5/$100M is too low. The Union and his agent would work very hard to keep him from signing that.

Boston-Born
02-21-2014, 03:46 PM
Lester is 2 years and 3 months older than Bailey. Bailey has been barley above average two years in his career, and career wise has a below average 96 ERA+. Lester is head and shoulders over him in the regular season and a giant in the post season.

As I've been saying for months Lester should end up around $22.5M per - or 5 for $112.5M. The idiot notion that Lester would sign for 5/$82.5M needs to given up. Even 5/$100M is too low. The Union and his agent would be morons to let him sign for that.

I was wrong in terms of age. But looking at games started and IP in the majors, Jon is almost 2:1 to Homer in both of those categories. I just feel like at this point in Jon's career, I am unsure if they will give him too much in terms of years. I do agree the per year amount will be much higher than the people saying 5/82.5.

bagwell368
02-22-2014, 10:12 PM
But looking at games started and IP in the majors, Jon is almost 2:1 to Homer in both of those categories. I just feel like at this point in Jon's career, I am unsure if they will give him too much in terms of years. I do agree the per year amount will be much higher than the people saying 5/82.5.

Lester has been carefully handled his whole career. He hasn't pitched too many pitches in a game or IP in a season. He has reacted to this treatment by never going out for even 1 start or 1 day on the DL for anything arm/shoulder related.

He's a metronome for IP: 210, 203, 208, 191, 205, 213 his last six years.

Bailey's adjusted career ERA: 4.49; Lester's: 3.86

Pitchers are pitchers, so any deal is a risk, but a 5 year extension doesn't seem unduly risky for Lester. 7? No, that's too much unless there is an out for the Sox or less money for less innings type thing.

RedSoxtober
02-24-2014, 05:30 PM
I was wrong in terms of age. But looking at games started and IP in the majors, Jon is almost 2:1 to Homer in both of those categories. I just feel like at this point in Jon's career, I am unsure if they will give him too much in terms of years. I do agree the per year amount will be much higher than the people saying 5/82.5.

You're overstating the difference by ignoring GS/IP in the minor leagues. Using 2007, Bailey's debut year in MLB, as the baseline Lester has thrown approx 1475IP over 238 starts to Bailey's 1200IP in 194 starts.

Bo Sox Fan
02-24-2014, 05:46 PM
There are only 2 players on this current roster I'm comfortable giving long term extensions to. Pedroia is already taken care of, Jon Lester is the other.

Get it done.

Boston-Born
02-24-2014, 06:05 PM
You're overstating the difference by ignoring GS/IP in the minor leagues. Using 2007, Bailey's debut year in MLB, as the baseline Lester has thrown approx 1475IP over 238 starts to Bailey's 1200IP in 194 starts.

I get that for sure, but it still doesn't mean Jon has more overall wear and tear on his arm.

bagwell368
02-24-2014, 09:43 PM
I get that for sure, but it still doesn't mean Jon has more overall wear and tear on his arm.

Lester has a very low impact delivery. Not a crazy arm whip, not a huge elbow torque. Clean and smooth. He has had very little stress throughout. Bailey I haven't seen enough to know well. He's big, he was very highly rated early on, he struggled, he's finally becoming an average 3rd SP the past two years, meanwhile Lester should have finished in the top 10 in the Cy four times since the start of 2009. Bailey never in the top 20.

Might Bailey out pitch Lester the rest of his career? Could be.

The point on Bailey is that given his history/current contract the notion floated here this winter that Lester could sign a 5/82.5 type deal seems hopelessly out of whack.

By signing this year while under contract to Boston, Lester does have protection from an injury, which could be part or all of his "discount". It seems as unlikely he signs for under $20M per as over $25M.

BostonSports96
02-25-2014, 02:01 AM
http://www.fangraphs.com/leaders.aspx?pos=all&stats=sta&lg=all&qual=y&type=6&season=2013&month=0&season1=2008&ind=0&team=0&rost=0&age=0&filter=&players=0

Fangraphs valued Lester's total performance over the past 6 seasons (2008-2013) to be worth $123.2 million ($20.53 million AAV).

His average annual statistics since 2008 are a 205 IP, 15-9 record, 3.65 ERA, 1.27 WHIP, 8.2 K/9 and 3.1 BB/9.

I'd say he's well worth a 6 year, $120 million extension, which pretty much exactly matches the AAV Fangraphs valued him at.

ZHawk1123
02-25-2014, 01:24 PM
I'd go 5/100 for Lester. I feel that's more than fair given his 'non elite' status.

bagwell368
02-25-2014, 04:10 PM
I'd go 5/100 for Lester. I feel that's more than fair given his 'non elite' status.

I forget the exact number, but using rWAR since 2008, Lester has 4 years in the top 9 in the AL. I think it was two other SP's in the AL or NL that had 4 or more.

Consistently posting 205 IP a year with fine numbers in a park like Boston (fans and offensive nature of the park) is pretty elite.

Two more years like last year (IE not that special) and he's easily into 2nd place all time among BoSox LHP. That's a lot of pitchers and a lot of years for a "non elite" SP.

RedSoxtober
02-25-2014, 06:46 PM
I get that for sure, but it still doesn't mean Jon has more overall wear and tear on his arm.

The difference is not 2:1 as you suggested.

Boston-Born
02-25-2014, 11:40 PM
The difference is not 2:1 as you suggested.

I said close.

bagwell368
02-26-2014, 09:01 AM
It's not close.

As professionals:

Lester 323 games > Bailey 261 games (Bailey appeared in 77% as many games as Lester)
Lester 1860 IP > Bailey 1437 IP (Bailey pitched in 81% as many games as Lester)

That's not 2 to 1 that's 5 to 4.

Per year Lester pitched 155 IP to 144 for Bailey; Lester 27 games per year to 26 for Bailey.

My bet, 8 years from now Bailey may still be decent and Lester will probably be retired, but in the next 6 seasons the track record, health records, post season records all indicate that Lester is worth more than Bailey, and he'll get more. Now having learned more about Bailey I'd take him on that contract as a #2 SP if the Sox needed one and could afford him after dealing with Lester - and deal away two of Lackey, Peavy, and Buchholz.

Bo Sox Fan
02-28-2014, 03:28 AM
Lester in a way, is our Andy Pettite. Like Bags said, he'll age well and continue to eat a ton of productive innings. He's not flashy like an ace, but he's far from terrible and well worth $20-23 million/per in this day and age at the going rate. Two World Series rings and a plethera of young arms on the way at bargain bin prices? Lackey, Peavy & Dempster all coming off the books in a year?

6 years, $132 million I can live with. Hell, Carl Crawford got more...

Vincent33
02-28-2014, 02:21 PM
I'll go with 5yr/$112M

bagwell368
03-25-2014, 08:50 AM
The word is this is moving forward. Most people think right after the season starts.

For those few figuring that he'd sign a $16M (5/$80M) per deal, think again - Max Scherzer was said to turn down a 6/140 deal yesterday.

JL's 5 best rWAR seasons: 6.3, 6.1, 5.2, 4.0, 3.0
MX 5 best rWAR seasons: 6.7, 4.2, 3.3, 1.3, 1.3

Lester is 6 months older but a LHP. If the Sox are very lucky they'll get him for $20M per - more likely IMO is ($22.5M per) 5/$112.5M or 6/$135M. If he really goes for a more top of the market deal it might be $24M per, which is a lot, but in this market is it really?

RedSoxtober
03-25-2014, 09:11 AM
Negotiations with Lester are more complex than with Ortiz, primarily because the star left-hander figures to make more money over a longer period of time. Lester likely is looking for a four- or five-year deal for at least $20 million per year to forego free agency after this season.

Cherington said the Sox haven’t scheduled additional face-to-face meetings with agents Sam and Seth Levinson, although conversations will continue throughout the week.

Lester reported last Friday that progress has been made but an agreement isn’t imminent. He also expressed a willingness to continue negotiations during the season as long as a deal is within reach. If the sides are too far apart, he may table the conversations.

Cherington also would prefer a resolution this week.Boston Herald

bagwell368
03-25-2014, 09:31 AM
Cherington also would prefer a resolution this week.

Lester worst case was a co-MVP of the playoffs last season. Even better for Lester the recent pitching deals also fall into the Lester should get more than $20M per camp.

Other Sox deals lately:

Pedroias deal for instance was a win-win (even though I was guarded about it at the time). He gets security, we get 2B locked up for a long time with a top 5 ML 2B...

Ortiz's deal? hard to see how the Sox come out on top on the field with that one. BC might find out first hand what sort of a bludgeon Ortiz's contract can be when it's used by other long term Red Sox stars such as Lester. I.E. "Give Ortiz the biggest DH contract in the history of baseball, but you want to give Lester a deal that puts him below pitchers he's better then? What sort of loyalty to a player that could easily be the MVP of the 2012 playoffs and Co-MVP of the WS?"

RedSoxtober
03-25-2014, 09:53 AM
I think the writer (Lauber?) was simply stating the obvious: it's at least $20M. How far north of that is uncertain. On the positive side, Lester indicated that he knew that it'd take a "hometown discount" to stay and that that didn't bother him. I don't think that I'd be too upset about something like $110M/5yr. I'd rather have a horse like that setting the standard for this next wave of pitchers than the bean pole they run by at the finish.

-Lavigne43-
03-29-2014, 11:59 AM
@alexspeier 1h
Cherington: 'We're going to hit the pause button' on talks with Lester.

@alexspeier 1h
Cherington says Sox still hope to keep him beyond 2014, but for now, both sides agreed to focus on preparing for season.

‏@alexspeier 1h
Cherington did not rule out resuming talks in season, though also said talks might wait till after the season.

Wow. I guess the team didn't consider what he wanted a discount.

-Lavigne43-
03-29-2014, 12:04 PM
@alexspeier 10m
Lester said talks with Sox were/are 'amicable' and both sides agree they'll be picked up at some point. He still wants to re-sign

@alexspeier 9m
However, given that he'd said talks would continue if they were at the 5-yard line, he was asked if they reached red zone. He said no.

‏@alexspeier 8m
'If it was the red zone, we'd still be talking,' said Lester. But he took no umbrage with lack of agreement. 'There's no war of words'

bagwell368
03-29-2014, 12:23 PM
If I had to guess I'd say the Sox wanted to give 5 with a team controlled option for 6, and the JL side wanted 6 w/ option for 7th triggered pretty easily.

Also maybe the Sox thought the AAV should be lower given that if it was signed now the Sox take on the risk of a catastrophic injury in '14 that they don't have to take on.

He's been my favorite Sox player since the first time I saw him, and as much as I like him, there is a point where it's too risky to sign him. 5 * $22.5M - good for both sides. If they want 6 * $25, with an option for 7 kicked in by 150 IP in either year 5 or 6? Too much.

Getting his best year this year, a 1st rounder, and ~$22.5M * 5 to use isn't the worst thing for the Sox.

I have the feeling that if he does leave that like Bruce Hurst he will regret it.

Pittz
03-29-2014, 01:27 PM
If a contract can't be agreed to and we're out of it by the deadline, Lester could net a great return...

Of course, I'd prefer a reasonable extension, but if that's out of the question, exploring trade options wouldn't be the worst thing in the world.

BostonSports96
03-29-2014, 04:50 PM
If a contract can't be agreed to and we're out of it by the deadline, Lester could net a great return...

Of course, I'd prefer a reasonable extension, but if that's out of the question, exploring trade options wouldn't be the worst thing in the world.

The way this Sox team is built and with the talent and depth of our farm system, this team is in a position to contend annually for the next 3-5 years. Suggesting we trade our Ace (and key component of our ability to contend) at the deadline this year if we are out of it (which I seriously doubt we will be) is ludicrous.

Pittz
03-29-2014, 05:38 PM
The way this Sox team is built and with the talent and depth of our farm system, this team is in a position to contend annually for the next 3-5 years. Suggesting we trade our Ace (and key component of our ability to contend) at the deadline this year if we are out of it (which I seriously doubt we will be) is ludicrous.

Lol, okay. I understand disagreeing with us being out of it, but if the two qualifiers are met that we aren't resigning Lester and we're out of it, I don't see how it would be ludicrous...

BostonSports96
03-29-2014, 05:44 PM
Lol, okay. I understand disagreeing with us being out of it, but if the two qualifiers are met that we aren't resigning Lester and we're out of it, I don't see how it would be ludicrous...

I already stated in my previous comment. Even if this team is out of it, they will still be in a position to contend annually for the next 3-5 years with their roster and farm system depth, and they need and want Lester back as part of the future of the team. No way they ditch trying to extend Lester, something will get done eventually.

Trading away your Ace, and sacrificing potential future success, for a package of prospects because the team is having a bad half season but is still in position to contend in the immediate future is completely ludicrous.

Pittz
03-29-2014, 05:54 PM
I already stated in my previous comment. Even if this team is out of it, they will still be in a position to contend annually for the next 3-5 years with their roster and farm system depth, and they need and want Lester back as part of the future of the team. No way they ditch trying to extend Lester, something will get done eventually.

Trading away your Ace, and sacrificing potential future success, for a package of prospects because the team is having a bad half season but is still in position to contend in the immediate future is completely ludicrous.

So you're just ignoring the other qualifier? I said if we aren't going to resign him. If Lester is refusing to sign anything less than $27mil per for 8 years, I think it'd probably be a good idea to trade him and maximize the return we could get, rather than just a pick. Again, assuming we're out of it and a deal CANNOT be reached...

This is really not a complicated premise, even if it is unlikely...

bagwell368
03-29-2014, 09:21 PM
Guys

By now the Sox should know if this is going to be easy, challenging (but likely), or we are way out in LF.

If the team is dead at the deadline and we think we won't sign Lester, than getting say 2x the return of a 1st rounder (or more) should make it clear that's the right move.

OTOH, if we think we can sign him and/or we are not out of it, it's not an issues or a question.

chill.

BostonSports96
03-29-2014, 09:49 PM
So you're just ignoring the other qualifier? I said if we aren't going to resign him. If Lester is refusing to sign anything less than $27mil per for 8 years, I think it'd probably be a good idea to trade him and maximize the return we could get, rather than just a pick. Again, assuming we're out of it and a deal CANNOT be reached...

This is really not a complicated premise, even if it is unlikely...

Unlikely? It's a goddamn near impossible premise. Lester looking for 8 years $27 million is crazy, no way he gets that, no way he asks for it.

And I didn't ignore the other qualifier, you just missed it. I said "...they need and want Lester back as part of the future of the team. No way they ditch trying to extend Lester, something will get done eventually."

BostonSports96
03-29-2014, 09:50 PM
Guys

By now the Sox should know if this is going to be easy, challenging (but likely), or we are way out in LF.

If the team is dead at the deadline and we think we won't sign Lester, than getting say 2x the return of a 1st rounder (or more) should make it clear that's the right move.

OTOH, if we think we can sign him and/or we are not out of it, it's not an issues or a question.

chill.

I fee the suggestion that we don't feel like we'll sign Lester is crazy...they'll extend him eventually.

Pittz
03-29-2014, 10:49 PM
Guys

By now the Sox should know if this is going to be easy, challenging (but likely), or we are way out in LF.

If the team is dead at the deadline and we think we won't sign Lester, than getting say 2x the return of a 1st rounder (or more) should make it clear that's the right move.

OTOH, if we think we can sign him and/or we are not out of it, it's not an issues or a question.

chill.

Thank you.

With that being said, hopefully something gets worked out.

-Lavigne43-
03-30-2014, 12:13 AM
They obviously are uncomfortable with what he wants since talks didn't go anywhere. Maybe they want to see him pitch well this year before giving it to him rather than reacting to the afterglow of the playoffs. I'm betting the disagreement is amount of years rather than $ per year. He's going to be 31 year one of his new deal, the Red Sox probably only want 4-5 years max, Lester probably wants 7.

bagwell368
03-30-2014, 06:48 AM
I fee the suggestion that we don't feel like we'll sign Lester is crazy...they'll extend him eventually.

Crazy? If he makes it to FA and goes to the highest bidder, it's unlikely the Sox can beat (or would want too) a high end offer.

RedSoxtober
03-30-2014, 07:20 PM
They obviously are uncomfortable with what he wants since talks didn't go anywhere. Maybe they want to see him pitch well this year before giving it to him rather than reacting to the afterglow of the playoffs. I'm betting the disagreement is amount of years rather than $ per year. He's going to be 31 year one of his new deal, the Red Sox probably only want 4-5 years max, Lester probably wants 7.

Given that he expects to take a discount to stay, his comments about Scherzer's deal are probably pretty telling ($144M/6yr would be hard to walk away from). Would you do $132-135M/6yr to keep him around? I'd probably be tempted to move forward. Maybe $113M/5yr with two options similar to Ortiz's (vesting option and a club option)?

BostonSports96
03-31-2014, 01:20 AM
Crazy? If he makes it to FA and goes to the highest bidder, it's unlikely the Sox can beat (or would want too) a high end offer.

I doubt the situation gets anywhere near that point, which is why the notion of trading him is crazy.

bagwell368
03-31-2014, 07:54 AM
I doubt the situation gets anywhere near that point, which is why the notion of trading him is crazy.

Supply and demand. If his "final" request was 6/144, which as a FA isn't exorbitant, and the highest they want to go is 5/112.5, you've got an impasse. You also have the Sox deciding between a haul from a trade or a draft pick - if we are in it at the deadline, forget a trade, but if we are out of it at the deadline and have no interest at 6/144 or more BC would be stupid to turn down an offer of 2.5x more than what a pick is seen as. Plus we duck roughly 1/2 a year of Lester's salary too boot.

It's not likely, but, to reject as "crazy" shows bias or lack of understanding.

ciaban
03-31-2014, 12:57 PM
Guys

By now the Sox should know if this is going to be easy, challenging (but likely), or we are way out in LF.

If the team is dead at the deadline and we think we won't sign Lester, than getting say 2x the return of a 1st rounder (or more) should make it clear that's the right move.

OTOH, if we think we can sign him and/or we are not out of it, it's not an issues or a question.

chill.

On the other hand, who is going to sell the future for 2+ months of Lester if they can't get a pick back.

ciaban
03-31-2014, 01:02 PM
Crazy? If he makes it to FA and goes to the highest bidder, it's unlikely the Sox can beat (or would want too) a high end offer.
Yeah look at the Yankees pitching going forward, if Pineda and Banuelos don't turn it around they are going to be in trouble. Why not steal him from the Sox all for the cost of an extra year.

bagwell368
03-31-2014, 02:00 PM
On the other hand, who is going to sell the future for 2+ months of Lester if they can't get a pick back.

Who is going to give a good sized package for a couple of months? Teams that are desperate or more likely teams that sign the extension with him at the time of the trade and are allowed a 48 window to figure it out as does happen in these cases.

Pittz
03-31-2014, 02:39 PM
On the other hand, who is going to sell the future for 2+ months of Lester if they can't get a pick back.

Is this just ignoring that these types of deals happen pretty regularly? The logic is sound for sure, but teams do get desperate. And, as Bags said, I imagine the team could be given a window to negotiate, or the team could bank on convincing him before FA.

RedSoxtober
04-01-2014, 03:57 PM
Is this just ignoring that these types of deals happen pretty regularly? The logic is sound for sure, but teams do get desperate. And, as Bags said, I imagine the team could be given a window to negotiate, or the team could bank on convincing him before FA.

Exactly right. The return for Garza last year was reasonably along these lines, for example, and Garza had his perennial health questions. Nolasco, too, for that matter. A playoff contender, particularly one that lost a SP, would pay this kind of premium or more for a guy with Lester's track record and post season experience.

I wouldn't advocate for it unless it became clear that there was no way they'd get a deal done... or he said "see you in February" when he agreed to the trade.

Station 13
04-10-2014, 03:33 PM
I got a feeling Lester is asking way too much otherwise both would mutually gotten it done.

bagwell368
04-10-2014, 08:12 PM
I got a feeling Lester is asking way too much otherwise both would mutually gotten it done.

Yeah but what is reasonable to each side?

If the Red Sox are offering 4/80 and Lester wants 6/144 I'd say both sides are out of order.

I'd give him 5/107.5 as an extension of what he has, and a Sox option for the year 6 for for $27.5M or a $5M buyout (which means basically 5/112.5 or 6/135.

He actually has a roughly 50/50 shot earning his earning his 5/112.5. Somewhat less at 6/135 - but it's up to the Sox.

Station 13
04-10-2014, 09:07 PM
5 at 20AAV sounds about right.

RedSoxtober
04-12-2014, 10:01 AM
^^ $100M/5yr sounds pretty low in the current market, especially with cold early-season temperatures helping Lester's cause at the moment (context is important in negotiations). $22.5M/yr seems to be the popular value for big name players -- with the top of the market pushing $25M -- so I'd be surprised to see a value at less than that. I'd probably be willing to go there over 5yrs guaranteed with the idea of filling in quality SP at club-friendly prices through development.

-Lavigne43-
04-12-2014, 12:46 PM
Rosenthal said on tv they offered him 4 years $80M. That's a ridiculous low ball offer, they gave Lackey more than that 4 years ago.

Soxfan85
04-12-2014, 02:46 PM
According to Ken Rosenthal of FOX Sports, Jon Lester turned down a four-year, $70-$80 million extension offer.
The offer, which is well below Lester's expected market value, could cost the Red Sox a chance at re-signing their ace left-hander. Rosenthal reports that Lester has cut off negotiations until the offseason, and appears as if he'll test the waters of free agency. WTF is wrong with the FO? He helped with 2 WS and u offer that? If he leaves nobody in are farm system will replace JL. Max Scherzer turned down 6 yrs 144M
*****!

Station 13
04-12-2014, 02:56 PM
That's an insulting offer.

-Lavigne43-
04-12-2014, 03:15 PM
@Ken_Rosenthal 12m
Sources say #RedSox offer to Lester was indeed 4 years, $70M, as @jeffpassan said - $17.5M per year.

That's an insult.

bagwell368
04-12-2014, 04:04 PM
You know, if the FO really doesn't want to sign Lester, you tell him something like - we think we are going to go young, and it'll be 2-4 years before we are in it the way we want. Nothing personal, you're a champ. At least that way you don't treat him like some unwanted one nighter you wish you never saw again.

Also if he was wired like Ortiz, would they offer him more to keep him quiet? I think maybe the 'gentlemen Jon" routing has hurt him.

He actually looks a bit less warm and fuzzy out there, he could have a beastly year. All you need is Lackey to age, Buchholz with his usual DL routine, Peavy gone, and no Lester? Hahhhahhhaaaa - another "bridge" year - times 3?

Station 13
04-12-2014, 04:31 PM
Lester has given us 200+ average since 2008. He was 23 when he pitch the clinching game of the 2007 World Series and helps us with 2 wins in 2013.

Pay the man cheapos.

limebalz05
04-12-2014, 04:50 PM
Sox have to offer him a good contract now. If enters free agency, he will be gone!

Pittz
04-12-2014, 06:52 PM
This is crazy! Ludicrous!

-Lavigne43-
04-12-2014, 08:21 PM
It's puzzling. Maybe they just want to see him pitch a good healthy 1st half instead of reacting solely to the WS. Maybe the plan is to go after Masterson in FA. Masterson only wanted 3 years ~$50M from the Indians, but the Indians wouldn't do it. Masterson obviously has a much shorter track record, but their numbers the last 3 years are not that different. If the Indians are out of it maybe we try trading for Masterson and extending him, because I imagine he will get much better offers than what he offered to the Indians if he has another good season.

2011-2013

Lester: 610.1 IP | 7.74 K/9 | 3.10 BB/9 | 4.03 ERA | 3.84 FIP
Masterson: 615.1 IP | 7.49 K/9 | 3.35 BB/9 | 3.86 ERA | 3.60 FIP

bagwell368
04-12-2014, 09:00 PM
It's puzzling. Maybe they just want to see him pitch a good healthy 1st half instead of reacting solely to the WS. Maybe the plan is to go after Masterson in FA. Masterson only wanted 3 years ~$50M from the Indians, but the Indians wouldn't do it. Masterson obviously has a much shorter track record, but their numbers the last 3 years are not that different. If the Indians are out of it maybe we try trading for Masterson and extending him, because I imagine he will get much better offers than what he offered to the Indians if he has another good season.

2011-2013

Lester: 610.1 IP | 7.74 K/9 | 3.10 BB/9 | 4.03 ERA | 3.84 FIP
Masterson: 615.1 IP | 7.49 K/9 | 3.35 BB/9 | 3.86 ERA | 3.60 FIP

BR shows the 2011-2014 park corrected ERA as 3.97 for Masterson, and 3.69 for Lester. Lester has also proven much more in the post season. Lester is also a LHP.

ciaban
04-13-2014, 07:16 AM
@Ken_Rosenthal 12m
Sources say #RedSox offer to Lester was indeed 4 years, $70M, as @jeffpassan said - $17.5M per year.

That's an insult.
He could easily get twice that in FA from the yankees no less.

-Lavigne43-
04-13-2014, 12:16 PM
BR shows the 2011-2014 park corrected ERA as 3.97 for Masterson, and 3.69 for Lester. Lester has also proven much more in the post season. Lester is also a LHP.

Sure, but how much better is he than Masterson? If you can get Masterson for ~$50M less on a shorter deal you are getting better value if they both perform the same as they have in the past. The FO loves Masterson, they've tried to trade for him so many times. In FA I'm sure he will get more money than what we just offered Lester though. Maybe the approach with Lester is to see how the FA/trade market shapes up and how our pitchers in the minors plus Doubront perform, knowing that they can sign Lester if they want mid season.

bagwell368
04-13-2014, 12:56 PM
Sure, but how much better is he than Masterson? If you can get Masterson for ~$50M less on a shorter deal you are getting better value if they both perform the same as they have in the past.

The past? The past is:

Lester 28.4 rWAR
Master 10.7 rWAR

Since Masterson has become a SP, his ERA+ marks are:

084
122
079
109
074 (in 3 starts this year) for a 95 mark. NINETY FIVE? He's a quarter of the way from average to replacement!!!

Lester has:

134
124
087
110
162 (in 3 starts this year) for a 112 ERA+

Lester is 17% better than Masterson basically inning over inning, and pounds the **** out of him career wise.

Nothing will make Masterson a LHP either - always useful vs the Yanks.

QS career: JL 59% > Masterson 54%

Masterson is a two pitch pitcher - dangerous for a starter. Lester has and uses 4.

Master's FB is down 3.3 MPH this year to 88.3, that's not good.


The FO loves Masterson, they've tried to trade for him so many times. In FA I'm sure he will get more money than what we just offered Lester though. Maybe the approach with Lester is to see how the FA/trade market shapes up and how our pitchers in the minors plus Doubront perform, knowing that they can sign Lester if they want mid season.

The Yanks and Dodgers are somewhat sated so that may knock down prices. I can see Masterson getting 5/$85, and Lester getting 5/$112.5 that's 24.5% more. Easily worth it when one considers the difference between a top 15 ace (1A) close to being 1B vs a borderline 2B/3A (with a 95 ERA+ since '10 he's no better than that). Also consider the LHP v RHP, playoffs, pitch variety and comfort in Boston (Masterson was here but he was no ace wannabe - just a pen guy with a rubber arm - so he isn't proven here IMO).

-Lavigne43-
04-13-2014, 02:18 PM
I could care less who is better over their entire career, I know that Lester smashes him in that category. Lester is not the same pitcher he was in '09-'10 when he had the peak of his career. Using 3 starts this season is also meaningless to back up any point, the season is going to be played out or half over before a decision is made. What matters right now is the last 3 full seasons, and Masterson is not far off from Lester in the recent past. The fact that he has not had the same career as Lester, does not have the postseason glory, is not left handed is why he will be massively cheaper than Lester. If Lester has another good season I think his price will be a lot higher than $112M, I'd imagine he's asking for more than that right now.

I'm just suggesting that maybe this is what the FO thinking is. Instead of immediately signing Lester when his value is at its highest, lets wait it out. Lets see how Lester pitches, lets see how Masterson pitches, lets see how the kids in the farm perform. If Masterson has another good year maybe they can get performance that is not too far off from Lester in the future, on a much shorter contract. Length of contract is definitely going to be the biggest gripe for them. They don't want to invest too much money on an aging pitcher with a ton of innings on his arm.

bagwell368
04-13-2014, 05:02 PM
Using 3 starts this season is also meaningless to back up any point

If everything before 2011 is ancient history, how can the 3 most recent starts of each be ignored?


What matters right now is the last 3 full seasons, and Masterson is not far off from Lester in the recent past.

Masterson has worked in fairly laid back mid western city while Lester has pitched in a pressure cooker. Lester had to work with 3 different pitching coaches in 3 years. He also had to work with the inferior Salty. Take Salty's numbers off of Lester's back and he crushes Masterson. Also Masterson has worked as a starter in the AL Central, generally easier than the AL East.


The fact that he has not had the same career as Lester, does not have the postseason glory, is not left handed is why he will be massively cheaper than Lester.

In part, but not in whole.


Lester has another good season I think his price will be a lot higher than $112M, I'd imagine he's asking for more than that right now.

I don't. It's not the rate that is wrong IMO it's the years - 6 for $135M is probably a pay day he would have taken. It might go to 6 for &147M in a bidding war, but that's about it,


I'm just suggesting that maybe this is what the FO thinking is. Instead of immediately signing Lester when his value is at its highest, lets wait it out.

There was no productive reason to lowball him. If he sucks /gets hurt we won't touch him. If he goes nuts and has a 7.2 WAR season, then we screwed up if the object is to sign him for a fair price.


Lets see how Lester pitches, lets see how Masterson pitches, lets see how the kids in the farm perform. If Masterson has another good year maybe they can get performance that is not too far off from Lester in the future, on a much shorter contract. Length of contract is definitely going to be the biggest gripe for them. They don't want to invest too much money on an aging pitcher with a ton of innings on his arm.

There is no other choice but to wait and see.

Sorry, but that innings argument is weak. Lester has been among the most closely watched and managed pitchers in big league history, he is built almost perfectly, and as of today he's a metronome for innings. His velocity remains strong and steady. Do I trust him to be a 210 ip guy in year six - no. But years 1-4 200+ np. 5-6 175+.

-Lavigne43-
04-13-2014, 07:29 PM
You're using 3 starts in the beginning of the season as if that definitively means anything about how good each pitcher is. If Lester is lousy his next start does that mean his value plummets?

I think the whole Salty thing gets used as a crutch way too often. I've heard numerous times about how Lester calls his own game, I find it hard to believe Salty has such a drastic effect. It's all too much of an excuse for Lester's decline from being a top tier pitcher for a couple years to a second tier pitcher. But I guess I wouldn't pick up Jose Fernandez on my fantasy team. Questioning whether Masterson can handle the pressure is off too. The guy pitched tremendously in high leverage roles for us during the 2008 run.

I agree, I don't understand why they offered such a ridiculously undervalued deal. Maybe the hometown discount got to their head a bit, then when they realized it would be more expensive they decided to wait it out. It's scary investing heavily in a pitcher over 30. I would still be very surprised if they didn't end up re-signing him. Masterson will probably be a target too if there is an open spot in the rotation.

Lester's velocity has dropped. In his best two seasons it averaged 93.5, 97.5 max. The last few years its been around 92.5, 96.5 max. So far this year in a way too small sample in April it's 91.5. I have no idea how he will hold up, the league has no idea how to predict pitching injuries and declines. I do know that a lot of workhorses with huge innings totals have suffered big velocity drops in recent years. CC's velocity has dropped massively the last 4 years, same with Felix Hernandez.

win red sox
04-13-2014, 08:32 PM
The 4/70 sounds like the same extension that Beckett agreed to during the 2010 season. Beckett's 3 years prior to signing the extension 07-09 were superior than Lester's last 3 years and it's not even close.

bagwell368
04-13-2014, 11:01 PM
You're using 3 starts in the beginning of the season as if that definitively means anything about how good each pitcher is. If Lester is lousy his next start does that mean his value plummets?

You are the one that shoveled everything prior to the past 3 years into the crapper. Well the past 3 years and the 3 starts they have both made this year seem like a perfectly fine thing to consider under the circumstances. Just following the rules that you set. I agree that looking at velocity this early isn't fair (godo thing too because Masterson's 88.3 FB average sucks bad) - OTOH results should count, a pitcher that has less than his full arsenal and pitches well is a big marker of an ace.


I think the whole Salty thing gets used as a crutch way too often. I've heard numerous times about how Lester calls his own game, I find it hard to believe Salty has such a drastic effect.

Find it hard to believe? It was hotly debated here in the off season. Did you miss it somehow? Salty was below the other catchers in house during his stay. I've got since the start of 2011 when Salty came Lester throwing a 3.63 ERA w/o Salty and a 4.20 ERA with him. In the big hitting/juicer years that .57 is even higher than the the difference between AL and NL ERA's. That's very significant since Salty caught 62.7% of Lesters innings during this period.


It's all too much of an excuse for Lester's decline from being a top tier pitcher for a couple years to a second tier pitcher.

Are you stating this as a fact, or an opinion, because that's the difference between an AL ace and an AL 2B sort of starter. Not really very close at all. I also disagree he was "2nd tier" in 2011 or the 2nd half of 2013 - Masterson is the 2nd tier pitcher here, not Lester.


Questioning whether Masterson can handle the pressure is off too. The guy pitched tremendously in high leverage roles for us during the 2008 run.

I guess I wasn't clear. I was talking about a highly paid ace or near ace SP, not a good set-up kid getting paid near the minimum, not remotely close roles. Also if Lester is a stud this year and next couple and Masterson comes here and buckles you don't think a lot of the Fenway "faithful" will come down on him hard as Lester's failed replacement? That's pressure. Standing in front of the media and getting peppered with questions about this contract and not being other than graceful unlike say Ortiz - that takes a lot, you are guaranteeing that Masterson is all this?

Also I missed your comments on Lester having 3 different pitching coaches 3 years in a row. That's a significant handicap to be working under, then toss in Salty's inferior game calling and defense in general, yet Lester never said a peep in public. Ortiz would have been throwing several nutties over that.


Lester's velocity has dropped. In his best two seasons it averaged 93.5, 97.5 max.

Excuse me? You insist on arguing only what has happened since the start of 2011, but when it suits your arguments, you want to talk earlier? OK, lets do it:

Per FanGraphs: Lester FB ave velocity:

2008: 92.1
2009: 93.7
2010: 93.3
2011: 92.8
2012: 92.6
2013: 92.7

Want to find me a SP with roughly as many innings in these years with such a flat ave FB velocity? Lester's total change across these 6 seasons is 2.8 MPH, with .5 as the biggest drop. Your claim of his velocity drop was cherry picked to make a point while missing the truth.

Let's check Masterson:

2008: 89.5
2009: 92.4
2010: 91.3
2011: 92.7
2012: 91.9
2013: 91.6

Masterson's change across these 6 seasons in 6.5 MPH, and he's had drops of 1.1 and .8 MPH as well. So if Lester is more than twice as steady as Masterson in total changes and more than that in the amount of his drops beyond .5 MPH what does that make Masterson?

Also comparing Lester to CC or any other pitcher for the purpose of raising doubts is ridiculous. CC was well overused in particular that year he was dealt to the Brewers and several years before and after. He's also been pitching at more than 315 lbs for a long time. He certainly doesn't look like he takes care of himself. Any comparison is speculation on your point. Felix was also overused. Lester has been treated much more carefully than either.

RedSoxtober
04-14-2014, 09:41 AM
Reasobable point here by Lester. If the Sox are serious about re-signing him then the offer must be at least plausible given the market. No doubt that the first digit in the AAV is a 2. If they want to go cheap then go short (3-4yrs) rather than low.


"i don't want to be the guy where you sign a deal and then a guy like [felix doubront] comes up and says (sarcastically), 'thanks jon for helping me out.' that's the tough part," lester said. "you've got to balance what makes you happy and still have to take into account where the players' association is, you have to take into account the market and what's fair, and then you do what makes you happy. If you're a little bit below market value and it makes you happy, who cares? If you're astronomically below market value, then that's where you need to look at it." m l b t r

filihok
04-14-2014, 10:46 AM
Find it hard to believe? It was hotly debated here in the off season. Did you miss it somehow? Salty was below the other catchers in house during his stay. I've got since the start of 2011 when Salty came Lester throwing a 3.63 ERA w/o Salty and a 4.20 ERA with him. In the big hitting/juicer years that .57 is even higher than the the difference between AL and NL ERA's. That's very significant since Salty caught 62.7% of Lesters innings during this period.
Well...Masterson has thrown a lot of innings to Santana whose not exactly a Molina behind the plate himself.


Per their careers
Lester: 1395.1 innings, 21.4 K%, 8.5 BB%, 3.75 ERA (85 ERA-), 3.70 FIP (85), 3.75 xFIP (89), 3.81 SIERA
Masterson: 939.0 innings, 18.8 K%, 9.5 BB%, 4.15 ERA (103), 3.89 FIP (97), 3.89 xFIP (94), 3.92 SIERA
*http://www.fangraphs.com/leaders.aspx?pos=all&stats=sta&lg=all&qual=0&type=c,13,120,121,6,117,45,118,62,119,122&season=2014&month=0&season1=2005&ind=0&team=0&rost=0&age=0&filter=&players=4930,2038
Lester, obviously, has the edge

2011 through current
Lester: 631.1 innings, 20.5 K%, 8.0 BB%, 3.98 ERA (94), 3.81 FIP (91), 3.75 xFIP (93), 3.81 SIERA
Masterson: 626 innings, 19.4 K%, 8.8 BB%, 3.94 ERA( 101), 3.63 FIP (93), 3.74 xFIP (92), 3.78 SIERA
*http://www.fangraphs.com/leaders.aspx?pos=all&stats=sta&lg=all&qual=0&type=c,13,120,121,6,117,45,118,62,119,122&season=2014&month=0&season1=2005&ind=0&team=0&rost=0&age=0&filter=&players=4930,2038
Nearly identical.


ZiPS and Steamer rest of season combined projections
Lester: 180 innings, 3.86 ERA, 3.81 FIP, 2.4 fWAR
Masterson: 178 innings, 3.91 ERA, 3.70 FIP, 1.9 fWAR
*Lester (http://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=4930&position=P)
*Masterson (http://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=2038&position=P)
Both projection systems favor Lester slightly.

I have to agree with Lavigne, if a team can sign Masterson for significantly less than they can sign Lester, then that team would, quite possibly, end up with the better deal.

bagwell368
04-14-2014, 11:42 AM
Well...Masterson has thrown a lot of innings to Santana whose not exactly a Molina behind the plate himself.

Between '11 & '13 Santana caught him for a total of 272 innings for a 3.50 ERA, not very good in '10 and '12, but he didn't catch Masterson as much as Salty caught Lester.


Per their careers
Lester: 1395.1 innings, 21.4 K%, 8.5 BB%, 3.75 ERA (85 ERA-), 3.70 FIP (85), 3.75 xFIP (89), 3.81 SIERA
Masterson: 939.0 innings, 18.8 K%, 9.5 BB%, 4.15 ERA (103), 3.89 FIP (97), 3.89 xFIP (94), 3.92 SIERA
*http://www.fangraphs.com/leaders.aspx?pos=all&stats=sta&lg=all&qual=0&type=c,13,120,121,6,117,45,118,62,119,122&season=2014&month=0&season1=2005&ind=0&team=0&rost=0&age=0&filter=&players=4930,2038
Lester, obviously, has the edge

2011 through current
Lester: 631.1 innings, 20.5 K%, 8.0 BB%, 3.98 ERA (94), 3.81 FIP (91), 3.75 xFIP (93), 3.81 SIERA
Masterson: 626 innings, 19.4 K%, 8.8 BB%, 3.94 ERA( 101), 3.63 FIP (93), 3.74 xFIP (92), 3.78 SIERA
*http://www.fangraphs.com/leaders.aspx?pos=all&stats=sta&lg=all&qual=0&type=c,13,120,121,6,117,45,118,62,119,122&season=2014&month=0&season1=2005&ind=0&team=0&rost=0&age=0&filter=&players=4930,2038
Nearly identical.


ZiPS and Steamer rest of season combined projections
Lester: 180 innings, 3.86 ERA, 3.81 FIP, 2.4 fWAR
Masterson: 178 innings, 3.91 ERA, 3.70 FIP, 1.9 fWAR
*Lester (http://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=4930&position=P)
*Masterson (http://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=2038&position=P)
Both projection systems favor Lester slightly.

I have to agree with Lavigne, if a team can sign Masterson for significantly less than they can sign Lester, then that team would, quite possibly, end up with the better deal.

So far the projections for '14 sure are missing for both guys, I wouldn't bring them up unless I wanted to make them look poorly.

Let's consider value. An ace is worth more than a 2 - even if we label Lester a 1B and Masterson a 2A (which is overly positive to your case IMO). Metrics are useless for a number of things that are factored in. Please explain what the value of Lesters post seasons records are not only to him per se - but what about the confidence the players in the game have because he's on the mound? A computer isn't programmed to notice. Ask a player, watch the players.

A lefty that can pitch in Fenway - go look that up. Go look up what happened to the 3 lefties that came up for the Sox at the same time: Tudor, Hurst, Ojeda. Fenway didn't prove out too well for two of them. Matt Young ring a bell? For that and other reasons, Masterson is not worth what Lester is worth, in particular to the Sox.

Now when does that become false? At 100/5 for both Lester wins. At 75/5 for Masterson and 100/5 it's much closer. Consider the pick, and maybe it's enough.

Next year Peavy is gone, Lackey is cheap (maybe), Buchholz isn't that expensive, everyone else is cheap. At those prices above I'll sign them both. But Lester at 4/100 and Masterson at 4/85? Can only pick one? Lester. Premium players cost more - and it's not linear. Now it's key not to overpay and it's key not to be too subjective. I wouldn't pay Lester 6/144, he's not worth it.

filihok
04-14-2014, 12:10 PM
Between '11 & '13 Santana caught him for a total of 272 innings for a 3.50 ERA, not very good in '10 and '12
Your point?
From 2010 to 2013 Masterson had a 4.05 ERA
He had a 4.37 ERA while throwing to Santana
and a 3.68 ERA while throwing to anyone not named after a Grammy winner.
Masterson's 4.37 ERA to Santana is about 19% higher than his ERA with any other catcher.

I've got since the start of 2011 when Salty came Lester throwing a 3.63 ERA w/o Salty and a 4.20 ERA with him.
If you're going to bring up Lester's struggles with Salty then at least be consistent and don't try to handwave away Masterson's troubles with Santana.


but he didn't catch Masterson as much as Salty caught Lester.
Santana has caught 42% of Masterson's innings
Salty caught 28% of Lester's innings






So far the projections for '14 sure are missing for both guys, I wouldn't bring them up unless I wanted to make them look poorly.
3 games.




Let's consider value.
Let's.


An ace is worth more than a 2 - even if we label Lester a 1B and Masterson a 2A (which is overly positive to your case IMO). Metrics are useless for a number of things that are factored in. Please explain what the value of Lesters post seasons records are not only to him per se - but what about the confidence the players in the game have because he's on the mound? A computer isn't programmed to notice. Ask a player, watch the players.

A lefty that can pitch in Fenway - go look that up. Go look up what happened to the 3 lefties that came up for the Sox at the same time: Tudor, Hurst, Ojeda. Fenway didn't prove out too well for two of them. Matt Young ring a bell? For that and other reasons, Masterson is not worth what Lester is worth, in particular to the Sox.
Nothing you posted considers value.



John Tudor 23-13 career in Fenway Park.
Bruce Hurst 57-33
Ojeda 20-17

Now, W-L record isn't a good way to judge a pitcher's performance. But, I don't understand your argument. Did they have high ERA's there? Yes. But Fenway is a high-offense environment.

Matt Young. A below average major league pitcher at the end of his career who didn't pitch well? Again, you're going to have to further explain your point if you have one.


Please explain what the value of Lesters post seasons records are not only to him per se - but what about the confidence the players in the game have because he's on the mound?
I don't know. Since you're the one trying believing that these things have value, you tell me.

We can make a case that those things have negative value.
Lester is one year older than Masterson but has almost 350 more professional innings on his arm. That's 2 seasons worth.
What of Lester's post season performance? Athletes are, generally, very competitive players. Am I to assume that playing with other players with postseason experience makes other players "better"? Why not the opposite. Why not assume that players' competitiveness would make them "better" when playing with an unknown? Why is the assumption not that players "up their game" when they don't have an experienced teammate to fall back on? Why do people have such low opinions of the psyches of professional athletes?
And do you believe that Lester "ups his game" in the playoffs? Why is that considered "upping his game" and not "coasting" through the regular season? Why should Lester's teammates be enamored with a guy who doesn't give his best most of the time?




Now when does that become false? At 100/5 for both Lester wins. At 75/5 for Masterson and 100/5 it's much closer. Consider the pick, and maybe it's enough.
Well, this is exactly what Lavigne said and that I agreed with. Now, it appears, we are 3 for 3.

bagwell368
04-14-2014, 02:24 PM
Your point?
From 2010 to 2013 Masterson had a 4.05 ERA
He had a 4.37 ERA while throwing to Santana
and a 3.68 ERA while throwing to anyone not named after a Grammy winner.
Masterson's 4.37 ERA to Santana is about 19% higher than his ERA with any other catcher.

If you're going to bring up Lester's struggles with Salty then at least be consistent and don't try to handwave away Masterson's troubles with Santana.

I didn't handwave anything. I didn't have time to do all the numbers so I brought up two years that seemed to run counter to the poor ones, thanks for filling in the rest.


3 games.

Yes, roughly 1/11 of the schedule. Since they are the most current stats we have, and both have 3 starts so far it would seem reasonable to add them to the mix.


Let's. Nothing you posted considers value.

Wrong. Your stats don't know how to count them as value - there is a gigantic difference and one that a guy like me that uses a ton of stats can see, but that you cannot. Don't blame me for your shortcomings willfull or otherwise.


John Tudor 23-13 career in Fenway Park.
Bruce Hurst 57-33
Ojeda 20-17

Using Won Loss records ...... why not all time slash & tOPS+ ?

Ojeda in Fenway Park: .281/.343//418 - 117 tOPS+
Tudor in Fenway Park: .279/.331/.446 - 130 tOPS+
Hurst in Fenway Park: .279/.335/.426 - 110 tOPS+


Now, W-L record isn't a good way to judge a pitcher's performance. But, I don't understand your argument. Did they have high ERA's there? Yes. But Fenway is a high-offense environment.

OK, let me deconstruct. Fenway used to be a gigantic hitters park - almost the Coors of its time back in the 1945-1980 period. They made physical changes (the hulking "700 Club" behind home which cut the breeze blowing out to LF, and cut HR rates to below average). LHP don't tend to get the same advantage against LHH as in most parks because if you work a good LHH hitter outside too much in Fenway, he'll just pop a double off of the wall. So it requires a LHP to be able to locate to both sides of the plate. Maybe not the most difficult sounding thing but do take a survey of lefties in Fenway, it's a pretty weak bunch in the post WW II period, even after the 700 Club. Even the visiting LHP unless they are in or near the RJ school don't fare all that well here compared to their RHP brethren. Since the Sox went away from big RHH power in their line-up, it's not as true.

So the point is the Sox developed 3 really good LHP, two that ace like years, and one - the one they kept who was a good 2 in his time and decent 3 at other times. Who gives up on LHP like that unless they can't hack the park or the city?

Lester CAN hack Fenway and Boston, and I feel sorry for you with all the time you spend and interest you have if you can't see that this is an important factor. It's easy to overstate and to understate, but any person or system that says it's value is nil is broken - period.


Matt Young. A below average major league pitcher at the end of his career who didn't pitch well? Again, you're going to have to further explain your point if you have one.

I always have a point. The point is he was entering his age 32 season, and the Sox paid at the time what was a great deal of money for him and he exploded in Fenway in '92.

Since Mel Parnell was an ace (in 1953), Lester is easily the best LHP pitcher the Sox have had. If Lester has a 5.0 WAR year this year, he'll easily have passed Parnell, Ruth and any other LHP in Sox history not named Lefty Grove. The Sox having had a good deal of money in the FA period, and notable great players earlier, and Lester is/will be #2, is it because he's great, or Fenway/Boston is tough, or the Sox suck at producing lefties? IMO it's mostly Fenway is tough, but Lester is really good. Successful left handedness matters here. On the field, where they play the games, not the game console or the rotoball "field".


Well, this is exactly what Lavigne said and that I agreed with. Now, it appears, we are 3 for 3.[/QUOTE]

Seemingly you don't know what "maybe" means. We also don't have real offers to consider. But hey, I understand a perfectionist like you wants to wrap up those pesky loose ends you can't seem to get.

filihok
04-14-2014, 03:04 PM
I didn't handwave anything. I didn't have time to do all the numbers so I brought up two years that seemed to run counter to the poor ones, thanks for filling in the rest.
How did they, to you, seem 'to run counter to the poor ones'?
For every year that Masterson has thrown a pitch to Santana his ERA with Santana catching has been higher than his season ERA.

From 2010 to 2013 Masterson had a 4.05 ERA
He had a 4.37 ERA while throwing to Santana
and a 3.68 ERA while throwing to anyone not named after a Grammy winner.
And to a greater degree than Lester's with Salty catching.

I've got since the start of 2011 when Salty came Lester throwing a 3.63 ERA w/o Salty and a 4.20 ERA with him.



Yes, roughly 1/11 of the schedule. Since they are the most current stats we have, and both have 3 starts so far it would seem reasonable to add them to the mix.
They absolutely have been added to the mix.

Per their careers
Lester: 1395.1 innings, 21.4 K%, 8.5 BB%, 3.75 ERA (85 ERA-), 3.70 FIP (85), 3.75 xFIP (89), 3.81 SIERA
Masterson: 939.0 innings, 18.8 K%, 9.5 BB%, 4.15 ERA (103), 3.89 FIP (97), 3.89 xFIP (94), 3.92 SIERA
*http://www.fangraphs.com/leaders.aspx?pos=all&stats=sta&lg=all&qual=0&type=c,13,120,121,6,117,45,118,62,119,122&season=2014&month=0&season1=2005&ind=0&team=0&rost=0&age=0&filter=&players=4930,2038
Lester, obviously, has the edge

2011 through current
Lester: 631.1 innings, 20.5 K%, 8.0 BB%, 3.98 ERA (94), 3.81 FIP (91), 3.75 xFIP (93), 3.81 SIERA
Masterson: 626 innings, 19.4 K%, 8.8 BB%, 3.94 ERA( 101), 3.63 FIP (93), 3.74 xFIP (92), 3.78 SIERA
*http://www.fangraphs.com/leaders.aspx?pos=all&stats=sta&lg=all&qual=0&type=c,13,120,121,6,117,45,118,62,119,122&season=2014&month=0&season1=2005&ind=0&team=0&rost=0&age=0&filter=&players=4930,2038
Nearly identical.
To consider them the entire mix, however, is incomplete at best.

We have a pretty good handle on projecting coin flips. But to expect exactly 1.5 heads per 3 flips is ridiculous. Likewise - to make a judgement about a projection's accuracy after 3 starts.



Wrong. Your stats don't know how to count them as value - there is a gigantic difference and one that a guy like me that uses a ton of stats can see, but that you cannot.
Do you know how to count them as value?
You appear to have missed my edit

I don't know. Since you're the one trying believing that these things have value, you tell me.

We can make a case that those things have negative value.
Lester is one year older than Masterson but has almost 350 more professional innings on his arm. That's 2 seasons worth.
What of Lester's post season performance? Athletes are, generally, very competitive players. Am I to assume that playing with other players with postseason experience makes other players "better"? Why not the opposite. Why not assume that players' competitiveness would make them "better" when playing with an unknown? Why is the assumption not that players "up their game" when they don't have an experienced teammate to fall back on? Why do people have such low opinions of the psyches of professional athletes?
And do you believe that Lester "ups his game" in the playoffs? Why is that considered "upping his game" and not "coasting" through the regular season? Why should Lester's teammates be enamored with a guy who doesn't give his best most of the time?



Using Won Loss records ...... why not all time slash & tOPS+ ?

Ojeda in Fenway Park: .281/.343//418 - 117 tOPS+
Tudor in Fenway Park: .279/.331/.446 - 130 tOPS+
Hurst in Fenway Park: .279/.335/.426 - 110 tOPS+
Because I'm not sure that tOPS+ makes park adjustments

tOPS+ - OPS+ of this split relative to the player or team's overall OPS: 100*((split OBP/total OBP) + (split SLG/total SLG) - 1)





So the point is the Sox developed 3 really good LHP, two that ace like years, and one - the one they kept who was a good 2 in his time and decent 3 at other times. Who gives up on LHP like that unless they can't hack the park or the city?
:confused:
You're evidence that John Tudor couldn't handle pitching in Boston or in Fenway was that the team traded him for Mike Easler?
I'm not going to go back and do an in-depth look at the state of the Red Sox when they traded all these guys away to check pitching depth, etc...
There are lots of reasons that a team might trade a pitcher away other than 'he can't hack it'.
One of those reasons may be that the team not good at valuing players.
Speaking of

I always have a point. The point is he was entering his age 32 season, and the Sox paid at the time what was a great deal of money for him and he exploded in Fenway in '92.
Matt Young wasn't an obviously good starting pitcher. Yeah, he was coming off a good season, but no one should have been expecting a repeat given his history.


Since Mel Parnell was an ace (in 1953), Lester is easily the best LHP pitcher the Sox have had. If Lester has a 5.0 WAR year this year, he'll easily have passed Parnell, Ruth and any other LHP in Sox history not named Lefty Grove. The Sox having had a good deal of money in the FA period, and notable great players earlier, and Lester is/will be #2, is it because he's great, or Fenway/Boston is tough, or the Sox suck at producing lefties? IMO it's mostly Fenway is tough, but Lester is really good. Successful left handedness matters here.


On the field, where they play the games, not the game console or the rotoball "field".
Ho hum.
Is anyone saying that Lester isn't good on the field?
Nope. Just saying the Masterson is nearly as good on the same fields



Seemingly you don't know what "maybe" means.
An alternative hypothesis: I do know what "maybe" means and you lost sight of what the discussion is about.

Lavigne posted that Masterson for $50 million less could be a better value then Lester.
You appeared to disagree
Lavigne and I posted evidence that Masterson and Lester have performed similarly over the last few seasons and might be expected to perform similarly over the next few or at least close enough that a smaller deal for Masterson might benefit the Sox.
You started talking about gaming consoles.

bagwell368
04-14-2014, 04:17 PM
How did they, to you, seem 'to run counter to the poor ones'?
For every year that Masterson has thrown a pitch to Santana his ERA with Santana catching has been higher than his season ERA.

I had about 2.5 minutes to deal with finishing the post when I thought up looking them up since no numbers were provided (did you run out of time too?), saw two good years and two bad, posted numbers which were not false, nor with a claim outside of that he had two good years. You already stated he sucked, I don't think anyone was taken in by my post - if that's what you were worried about, but it's good to know that you care. BTW, you did not provide any data, just an opinion, that's awfully subjective of someone that lives and dies by metrics....


Yes, roughly 1/11 of the schedule. Since they are the most current stats we have, and both have 3 starts so far it would seem reasonable to add them to the mix.
They absolutely have been added to the mix.

To consider them the entire mix, however, is incomplete at best.

As I wrote in an earlier post (prior to your entry into this portion of this debate), looking at their velocity is bogus because everybody is down early. However a P that can get good results with less than stellar stuff - it's notable. It's also the freshest results we have. Since its after any time frame that's been named - 2010 by me, 2011 by another poster it meets both criteria. It also meets "career" as a criteria.

If in their next games Lester gives up 7 ER in 2 2/3 and Masterson gives up 1 in 7 2/3 are you going to change the tune? "Yes a sample of size of 4/34 constitutes an adequate size to now be counted" (just funnin' with you...)


We have a pretty good handle on projecting coin flips. But to expect exactly 1.5 heads per 3 flips is ridiculous. Likewise - to make a judgement about a projection's accuracy after 3 starts.

It's an early trend, and in every walk of life I've been in since diapers, trends need to be paid attention too. In addition to just being a trend - it's DATA - making it holy (I mean in a purely mathematical sense of course) - thus what else can we do but count it?


Do you know how to count them as value?

Hueristics.


Because I'm not sure that tOPS+ makes park adjustments

Well if I had the time (which I won't until about 9 PM) I'd look it up.


You're evidence that John Tudor couldn't handle pitching in Boston or in Fenway was that the team traded him for Mike Easler?

The fact that they traded a promising young LHP for a 33 year old DH coming off of 3 years of: 111, 112, 116 OPS+ (games played: 95, 142, 115) - yes, it's evidence - naturally.


I'm not going to go back and do an in-depth look at the state of the Red Sox when they traded all these guys away to check pitching depth, etc...

I was there, Boston was a very sour place indeed and young pitchers were at particular risk for getting chewed out and spit out. These guys in particular were getting hammered by the fans and press. If I have the time I'll tell you about Bobby Sprowl someday - said by several HOF hitters to have better stuff than any ML pitcher even when he was in his late 30's and was out of the game for about 13 years. Bob Montgomery and Boston in 1978 was about all it took.


Is anyone saying that Lester isn't good on the field?
Nope. Just saying the Masterson is nearly as good on the same fields

By your measurements and vision seemingly.


An alternative hypothesis: I do know what "maybe" means and you lost sight of what the discussion is about.

Fine turn of phrase. I don't think Masterson is as good as Lester in Boston. Might he be 86% as good over the next 4 years? Sure. Might he cost 73% as much as Lester? Sure. The question is - is a players value absolutely tied to stats and nothing else? You seem to be saying so, and I'll pay the 27% premium for 14% better performance.

Your kind of logic ends up with an inexpensive team of mildly above average players performance wise that don't beat aces often and don't win playoff series often. You have to have some players playing at an elite level on your team. You can't afford for all of them to be that way, but you do need some to have repeatability in the playoffs, not a weak sister that gets in the playoffs once every 14 years.

BTW, since we are musing here, tell me that the Red Sox win the WS in 2013 with Masterson instead of Lester. Can you do it? Curious to hear this one.


Lavigne posted that Masterson for $50 million less could be a better value then Lester.
You appeared to disagree

There a good deal of posts and rhetoric since that time, let's go back in time... No I don't believe Lester is going to get 6/144 and Masterson 6/94. I'd say Lester gets 5/112.5 and Masterson gets 5/82.5 if the projections are on. That's $30M over 5, $6M per. Put it this way, it's not ridiculous to go either way. I prefer Lester for reasons mostly given already, you two like Masterson based on price/performance. Thankfully the choice has to be made in the matrix of dozens of other choices and not just this single "all other things being equal" way that you are posing it.


Lavigne and I posted evidence that Masterson and Lester have performed similarly over the last few seasons and might be expected to perform similarly over the next few or at least close enough that a smaller deal for Masterson might benefit the Sox.


Well that's a nice story, but I didn't see a presentation of stats from Lavigne that was satisying to me. For somone that lives and breathes arguing over very minute points it's surprising to see you argue against me for behaving like you in this particular instance.

bagwell368
04-14-2014, 04:20 PM
Could this have the stench of Larry Lucchino on it?

Home grown. Two time WS winner (one of which is almost impossible to imagine winning without), playoff stud, quiet, well behaved, professional, left handed, one of the best SP's in baseball since 2008...

You offer him 4/$70 with the current market conditions? Couldn't come up with 4/$90 or 5/$112.5?

-Lavigne43-
04-15-2014, 02:02 PM
You are the one that shoveled everything prior to the past 3 years into the crapper. Well the past 3 years and the 3 starts they have both made this year seem like a perfectly fine thing to consider under the circumstances. Just following the rules that you set. I agree that looking at velocity this early isn't fair (godo thing too because Masterson's 88.3 FB average sucks bad) - OTOH results should count, a pitcher that has less than his full arsenal and pitches well is a big marker of an ace.



Find it hard to believe? It was hotly debated here in the off season. Did you miss it somehow? Salty was below the other catchers in house during his stay. I've got since the start of 2011 when Salty came Lester throwing a 3.63 ERA w/o Salty and a 4.20 ERA with him. In the big hitting/juicer years that .57 is even higher than the the difference between AL and NL ERA's. That's very significant since Salty caught 62.7% of Lesters innings during this period.



Are you stating this as a fact, or an opinion, because that's the difference between an AL ace and an AL 2B sort of starter. Not really very close at all. I also disagree he was "2nd tier" in 2011 or the 2nd half of 2013 - Masterson is the 2nd tier pitcher here, not Lester.



I guess I wasn't clear. I was talking about a highly paid ace or near ace SP, not a good set-up kid getting paid near the minimum, not remotely close roles. Also if Lester is a stud this year and next couple and Masterson comes here and buckles you don't think a lot of the Fenway "faithful" will come down on him hard as Lester's failed replacement? That's pressure. Standing in front of the media and getting peppered with questions about this contract and not being other than graceful unlike say Ortiz - that takes a lot, you are guaranteeing that Masterson is all this?

Also I missed your comments on Lester having 3 different pitching coaches 3 years in a row. That's a significant handicap to be working under, then toss in Salty's inferior game calling and defense in general, yet Lester never said a peep in public. Ortiz would have been throwing several nutties over that.



Excuse me? You insist on arguing only what has happened since the start of 2011, but when it suits your arguments, you want to talk earlier? OK, lets do it:

Per FanGraphs: Lester FB ave velocity:

2008: 92.1
2009: 93.7
2010: 93.3
2011: 92.8
2012: 92.6
2013: 92.7

Want to find me a SP with roughly as many innings in these years with such a flat ave FB velocity? Lester's total change across these 6 seasons is 2.8 MPH, with .5 as the biggest drop. Your claim of his velocity drop was cherry picked to make a point while missing the truth.

Let's check Masterson:

2008: 89.5
2009: 92.4
2010: 91.3
2011: 92.7
2012: 91.9
2013: 91.6

Masterson's change across these 6 seasons in 6.5 MPH, and he's had drops of 1.1 and .8 MPH as well. So if Lester is more than twice as steady as Masterson in total changes and more than that in the amount of his drops beyond .5 MPH what does that make Masterson?

Also comparing Lester to CC or any other pitcher for the purpose of raising doubts is ridiculous. CC was well overused in particular that year he was dealt to the Brewers and several years before and after. He's also been pitching at more than 315 lbs for a long time. He certainly doesn't look like he takes care of himself. Any comparison is speculation on your point. Felix was also overused. Lester has been treated much more carefully than either.

3 starts is 3 starts, you can't come to any kind of conclusion based off 3 starts. It's also not relevant to my point, which was that perhaps the Red Sox want to wait before re-signing Lester because they see Masterson as a much more cost effective alternative, whose numbers the last 3 seasons (standard number to evaluate a players current performance) are similar to Lester's. The Red Sox decided to wait before the season started, and a decision is not going to be made right now. They will either have a half season worth of new data (if they decide to trade for Masterson, or if they decide to step up the negotiations with Lester because the alternatives are bad), or it will be at the end of the season. Obviously this seasons data will be the most important seasons data at the time that decision is made. Right now it's nothing, no one can tell how a pitcher will perform based off their first 3 starts of the season.

Obviously I have seen all of the Salty stuff. It's of ridiculous to solely blame Salty on a veteran pitchers decline. If we completely blame Salty for all failures, how come the other catchers don't get all credit for all successes? Salty is a bad catcher, but he does not get all the blame for Lesters era increasing and his K rate falling. He's more of an issue for inexperienced pitchers. If it all was Salty's fault then that's a negative with Lester since it means he relies way too heavily on the catcher to make all pitch decisions. What happens when our veteran catchers get replaced by rookie catchers?

A top tier pitcher does not only perform like a top tier pitcher for parts of random seasons or only one season. I can say Masterson was a top tier pitcher in 2011 too, or in parts of previous seasons. Lester is not top tier, that belongs to Kershaw, Verlander, Lee, Felix, maybe others like Price or Sale. Lester is not at that level.

I would say coming in during the 8th and/or 9th inning, sometimes with runners on, during the ALDS and ALCS has as much pressure as any situation. If he can handle that perfectly then I think he can handle idiots like Cafardo writing a stupid article, or talk show radio saying stupid stuff. He definitely wouldn't be brought in as if he was going to be the ace of the staff. The Red Sox would downplay expectations as much as possible.

It's really two pitching coaches in 2 years since it's sandwiched by Farrell on both ends. He was fine in 2011 until the end of the season and was horrible in 2012. How much blame does the pitching coach deserve, I don't know? You can't completely and definitively blame the pitching coach for Lester pitching like ****

I was refuting your statement that his velocity has not changed because it hasn't and will likely continue to inch downward like it does with every pitcher. He's completely fine with it now, but when it drops some more I have no idea how much it will effect his pitching. He clearly is not the same guy he was in 2009 when he had his best season, and 2010. He was one of the most unhittable pitchers in baseball those two seasons, only Lincecum had a higher K rate. His stuff has clearly declined since then. Those swings and misses he used to get have become more fouled off pitches.

I don't pretend to know how Lester will pitch in the future, if he will get hurt, if he will decline sharply, or if he will hold steady. I have no clue, and I don't think anyone knows, which is why it's risky to give any pitcher over 30 a long term deal. It's why the Red Sox are probably being cautious, and looking at alternatives. I can see the logic behind going after Masterson if he has another good season and can be had at a much shorter contract. He's definitely a target given how often they have tried trading for him in the past. I don't understand why they made such a low ball offer to Lester. They were pressured by his hometown discount comments to get something done, but they could have just told him they wanted to wait.

Bo Sox Fan
04-15-2014, 02:37 PM
I can't imagine this rotation without Lester going forward into the next 5-6 years. If they don't get him resigned they are just being overly cheap. There is no way he comes back if he hits free agency next season because the price will astronomically sky rocket letting other teams get involved. Loosen up your murse strings Henry and pay the man. Here are some legitimate comparables:

Grienke ~ 6 years $147 mil. $24.5 mil/annually
Hamels ~ 6 years $144 mil. $24.0 mil/annually

If he wants a home town discount to stay, I'm sure this is more than reasonable:

Lester ~ 6 years $135 mil. $22.5 mil/annually. In 3 years, $22.5 for even a middle of the rotation calibre pitcher will be more than reasonable, if not a bargain looking at the going rate in top of the line pitchers.

Norieaga
04-15-2014, 03:39 PM
The number I keep thinking of is 5/$110M. Boston's offer of $70M was definitely insulting, at some point the standard market value is just so obvious.

RedSoxtober
04-15-2014, 04:07 PM
I can't imagine this rotation without Lester going forward into the next 5-6 years. If they don't get him resigned they are just being overly cheap. There is no way he comes back if he hits free agency next season because the price will astronomically sky rocket letting other teams get involved. Loosen up your murse strings Henry and pay the man.
IMO it's overly simplistic to suggest that the ONLY reason that the Sox don't sign him is that they are overly cheap. What if you signed Scherzer for more than what Lester would settle for? That's not being 'cheap'.

There are several nice options on the FA market who could be had on a shorter and/or less expensive deal (Cueto, Masterson, Price -- potential, Shields, Scherzer). That need not represent being cheap if it meant that you could spend more in other areas. For example, what if you signed Masterson for less and then traded for Stanton and handed him a contract that you couldn't have afforded if you'd signed Lester? Again, not cheap, just reallocating resources.


Here are some legitimate comparables:

Grienke ~ 6 years $147 mil. $24.5 mil/annually
Hamels ~ 6 years $144 mil. $24.0 mil/annually
Both guys signed going into their age-29 season. Lester will be two years older and that is not insignificant. Neither is it insignificant that Lester will have thrown 120-200 more MLB regular season innings than both when he starts the new contract. Were Lester a couple years younger and with fewer IP there would be less concern.

How about a couple of other comps: Johan Santana and Cliff Lee. Santana signed an extension that began with his age 30 season and has roughly the same number of innings as Lester. He obviously had a much higher peak than Lester... but the valley he's walked through should be somewhat cautionary when considering extending an age 30+ pitcher. Lee signed heading into his age-32 season with fewer IP and while his performance in the NL has been very good (if down from the peak) the Phillies were still looking to get out from under the deal because of it's restraint on the club from making other deals to improve.


If he wants a home town discount to stay, I'm sure this is more than reasonable:

Lester ~ 6 years $135 mil. $22.5 mil/annually. In 3 years, $22.5 for even a middle of the rotation calibre pitcher will be more than reasonable, if not a bargain looking at the going rate in top of the line pitchers.
AAV is reasonable though I'd say 4-5 years is more favorable for the Sox. $22.5M is not much of a discount either.

Bo Sox Fan
04-15-2014, 05:29 PM
I look at Lester as our Andy Pettite. A guy who will age well and although he still hasn't convinced people that he's a legitimate ace, he's a very steady productive pitcher like Pettite.

I easily see Lester living up to a 5-6 year deal, and then may even look for one more pay day at a less annual average after the contract he recieves this offseason from whatever team signs him.

He's proven himself year after year in the AL East and is built like an ox, pay the man. I'd take him over Scherzer, Masterson, Shields, etc...

Price is looking at a Kershaw extension when the time comes, no thanks.

bagwell368
04-16-2014, 10:26 AM
3 starts is 3 starts, you can't come to any kind of conclusion based off 3 starts.

What's the big deal, each season you want to look at has 3 starts followed by 3 starts, etc. It's the most recent sample we have, and with BR's multi year averaging abilities, when you grab 2011 and up, viola! there it is. Last year when Drew missed ST, there was a lot written about how to count his first 10-12 games, and a lot written about Napoli at around the 15 game mark. 3 starts is basically 1/11 of the season, for a positional player that plays 155 games, 14 games is 1/11. So it's OK to talk about a hitter after 14 games (or less) because "14" sounds more than "3" when it's the same thing for each type of player? Ummm. No.


It's also not relevant to my point, which was that perhaps the Red Sox want to wait before re-signing Lester because they see Masterson as a much more cost effective alternative, whose numbers the last 3 seasons (standard number to evaluate a players current performance) are similar to Lester's.

That's an interesting conjecture, but has zero basis in fact AFAWK. I also reject your regular season findings as incomplete view because:

1. The AL East and AL Central with the Sox and Indians removed leaves the East with better hitting, pitching, and more offensive parks than in the Central. Even adjusted stats may understate the impact of those things.

2. Post season. Even if only adding them in as regular season stats, in 2013 Lester pitched 248 innings with a 3.45 ERA and a 19-9 record. Adding in 34 2/3 innings with 6 ER for Lester in 2013 from the post season impacts his raw results in a decisive manner and demonstrates his post season abilities, which are marked.

Masterson pitching two scoreless in 2013 vs TB in a game he didn't start. Those are the only post season records either has since the start of 2011 - advantage Lester.

3. Velocity changes. Actually in opposition to what you claimed Lester's FB speed has varied about 2.5x less then Masterson's since 2008, and Masterson has had two years with well more sizable dips from year to year than Lesters "worst" year. So, that's an advantage, not a disadvantage for Lester vs Masterson.

4. Pitching Coach changes. Even though Masterson had his "bum" catcher too, he didn't have the 5 different coaches in 4 years - the middle two years with pitching coaches - all of them failures here. McClure didn't even talk to his Mgr, wonder if he talked to his pitchers? Didn't look like he did anything useful with them even if he had talked to them.


The Red Sox decided to wait before the season started, and a decision is not going to be made right now. They will either have a half season worth of new data (if they decide to trade for Masterson, or if they decide to step up the negotiations with Lester because the alternatives are bad), or it will be at the end of the season. Obviously this seasons data will be the most important seasons data at the time that decision is made. Right now it's nothing, no one can tell how a pitcher will perform based off their first 3 starts of the season.

The Sox decision can only be judged in hindsight, but as I pointed out 3 starts for a SP is the effectively the same thing as 14 games for an everyday player that plays 155 games.


Obviously I have seen all of the Salty stuff. It's of ridiculous to solely blame Salty on a veteran pitchers decline.

I guess you missed the two times I mentioned the 4 years in a row of 5 different pitching coaches. That's a lot of churn, more than Masterson has had to face. Let me put more meaning around that. There was never anything along the lines of injury (shoulder, wrist, elbow, back, etc.) to account for the period that Lester did not pitch well in those years. However he lost some velocity and his pitches didn't have the same bite, which says to me grip and wrist snap - two fine points pitchers are always grappling with. A good attentive coach can catch a player falling off from normal quite quickly, a disinterested/stupid coach will tend not to. A catcher with as little on the ball as Salty, can't help either, and in two seasons seemed in particular seemed to hurt a good deal. Last year Salty did better because he took a lot more calls from the dugout than he had the two prior years.


If we completely blame Salty for all failures, how come the other catchers don't get all credit for all successes?

Don't put words in my mouth, I never said "all" that's your word.


Salty is a bad catcher, but he does not get all the blame for Lesters era increasing and his K rate falling.

He gets none? Based on what? I say he gets some and possibly a lot based on stats, and observations.


He's more of an issue for inexperienced pitchers.

Are you a big league pitcher? How do you know? The things that can bedevil an ace are often times very subtle. There is NO damage to Lester's body from these down times, so then it appears almost for sure it wasn't a physical issues of Lesters. If he had a UCL injury or whatever, he'd have to be downrated, but he didn't.


If it all was Salty's fault then that's a negative with Lester since it means he relies way too heavily on the catcher to make all pitch decisions.

Again the use of the word "all". The inanity of this claim is beyond "all" bounds. Pitchers like what works and what they are used to. If Lester is used to not arguing with his catcher because it bothers his concentration and sangfroid on the mound - he won't and there is nothing remotely near "too heavily" about it. Some pitchers talk a lot - after games with the Catcher and Coach. Some just want to throw. Lester won us the WS last year, no other ace last year put up anything like he did in the post season. He faced down cancer, won game 4 of the WS in 2007 as a kid. That's a pretty decent resume. You feel free to tell him he should shake off his catchers more. Good luck.


What happens when our veteran catchers get replaced by rookie catchers?

If Masterson is such a wonder, how come he couldn't overcome his catching pariah? He must have relied too heavily on him... That's *sarcasm* not an actual claim. Maybe you missed it, but more and more the Manager or Pitching Coach calls games. I'm quite sure that Vazquez gets here, he'll be doing the same. The days of the Varitek maybe coming to a close, except in the case of the special few. Ross is one of those old time Yoda catchers, I sure hope they bring up Vazquez at least by Sep 1 to learn more from him.


A top tier pitcher does not only perform like a top tier pitcher for parts of random seasons or only one season. I can say Masterson was a top tier pitcher in 2011 too, or in parts of previous seasons. Lester is not top tier, that belongs to Kershaw, Verlander, Lee, Felix, maybe others like Price or Sale. Lester is not at that level.

Does his not belonging to that club mean that Masterson does? Lester is one of the 12 best SP's in the ML since 2008, and has notable playoff success - and that makes him an ace. Masterson isn't an ace. He might be a 2A (top half of the 2nd's) - that's real good.


I would say coming in during the 8th and/or 9th inning, sometimes with runners on, during the ALDS and ALCS has as much pressure as any situation. If he can handle that perfectly then I think he can handle idiots like Cafardo writing a stupid article, or talk show radio saying stupid stuff. He definitely wouldn't be brought in as if he was going to be the ace of the staff. The Red Sox would downplay expectations as much as possible.

I'm not familiar with Cafardo's piece, I've been very busy lately. I always liked Masterson and I was on record against the deal that traded him. If Lester and he were on the starting staff in two years and everyone else on it now was gone replaced by others, I'd be fine.


It's really two pitching coaches in 2 years since it's sandwiched by Farrell on both ends.

Farrell was not the pitching coach when he was brought in to Manage.

Pitching Coaches:

2010: Farrell (good)
2011: Young (not so hot, not invited back)
2012: McClure & Niemann (not so good, not invited back)
2013: Nieves (good and steady)


He was fine in 2011 until the end of the season

Lester's 2011 was worse than all 3 years before it. It was good, not excellent.


and was horrible in 2012.

Yup he had is only below lg average year of his career - Masterson has 4, working on 5.


How much blame does the pitching coach deserve, I don't know? You can't completely and definitively blame the pitching coach for Lester pitching like ****

At least you didn't use to word "all". Lester did not have an ERA of infinity. Back in the offseason when Lester and the catchers were being gone over with a fine tooth comb, one of the SABR's that posts here and I came to agree that Salty was at least 15 if not 20% worse than the other catchers. Call him 17.5%, and call the Pitching coach 7.5% - that's 25% add that to his 87 ERA+ and he's in the same area as his ERA+ as 2011.


but when it drops some more I have no idea how much it will effect his pitching.

Ohhhh, fear mongering.... you could say that about any pitcher, thus it has no meaning unless you have a specific example connected to Lester.


He clearly is not the same guy he was in 2009 when he had his best season, and 2010. He was one of the most unhittable pitchers in baseball those two seasons, only Lincecum had a higher K rate. His stuff has clearly declined since then. Those swings and misses he used to get have become more fouled off pitches.

Lester has always been more about location and deception that outright speed. He's no Randy.

Masterson has an 8.8 K/9 rate this year, not helping him too much right now.


I don't pretend to know how Lester will pitch in the future, if he will get hurt, if he will decline sharply, or if he will hold steady. I have no clue, and I don't think anyone knows, which is why it's risky to give any pitcher over 30 a long term deal.

So you support Theo's bum for $1M * 15 guys and see what shakes out in ST?


It's why the Red Sox are probably being cautious, and looking at alternatives.

Lackey was signed for more in a lesser market with many more questions about his shoulder, and he was at best a 1B ace, more a 2A. Beckett was great when he was healthy and he battled weight problems and he got inked for a nice extension in a lesser market. ****ING Homer Baily got a bigger pile. What's Lester done wrong? Be a soft spoken team player that axes opponents in the playoffs - what a crummy resume....


I can see the logic behind going after Masterson if he has another good season and can be had at a much shorter contract. He's definitely a target given how often they have tried trading for him in the past.

OK, so no Lester, no Peavy, Buchholz on the DL as usual, Lackey pissed at having to play at $500k, trick or treat Duobront, Workman, and "the kid"... that's our staff next year? So we're talking bridge year, because SV, Napoli, Ortiz, etc. will be collecting SSDI (SS disabilty)... BC won't make a big plungs on a big hitter... Can Lester cover all that? No, But a staff headed by Lester and Masterson has a heft to it that would be helpful. Now if BC figures it's 3 more years before we're back in? Sure cash in Lester. Fans are not dumb. The Sox can do few wrongs this year, but next year the long knives will be out if the team doesn't spend.


I don't understand why they made such a low ball offer to Lester. They were pressured by his hometown discount comments to get something done, but they could have just told him they wanted to wait.

Right, just stay quiet.

bagwell368
04-16-2014, 10:36 AM
How about a couple of other comps: Johan Santana and Cliff Lee. Santana signed an extension that began with his age 30 season and has roughly the same number of innings as Lester. He obviously had a much higher peak than Lester... but the valley he's walked through should be somewhat cautionary when considering extending an age 30+ pitcher.

Don't like it. Santana was a brilliant and smaller framed pitcher ('6 210) with a fairly violent delivery. He pitched a ton of innings (4 out of 5 years in a row between 228 and 234 IP - and he was never the same again). JS wasn't as protected as Lester who has much cleaner and milder mechanics and is of a much larger frame (6' 4" 240). Lester has pitched 5 out of 6 years between 203 and 213 IP, and has zero stays on the DL.

He's not a comp IMO, not at all close.

JS is closer to Pedro and Saberhagen and Guidry. Lester is closer to Clemens, Ryan, Halladay.

filihok
04-16-2014, 11:56 AM
I'm also a bit short on time but these things stood out to me so I'll respond now:


What's the big deal, each season you want to look at has 3 starts followed by 3 starts, etc. It's the most recent sample we have, and with BR's multi year averaging abilities, when you grab 2011 and up, viola! there it is. Last year when Drew missed ST, there was a lot written about how to count his first 10-12 games, and a lot written about Napoli at around the 15 game mark. 3 starts is basically 1/11 of the season, for a positional player that plays 155 games, 14 games is 1/11. So it's OK to talk about a hitter after 14 games (or less) because "14" sounds more than "3" when it's the same thing for each type of player? Ummm. No.
We shouldn't really look at 14 starts by a non-pitcher as being representative either.

http://www.fangraphs.com/library/principles/sample-size/

Lester has faced 83 hitters this season. Based on the above that's only significant to his K%, GB% and FB%.
All 3 are up (meaning better for Lester, not a higher number) slightly - but still probably within a standard error of his projections.
Same for Masterson.
Statistically, both pitchers are doing what we expected them to coming into the season based on the samples that we have.


1. The AL East and AL Central with the Sox and Indians removed leaves the East with better hitting, pitching, and more offensive parks than in the Central. Even adjusted stats may understate the impact of those things.
Or adjusted stats may overrate them, correct?


2. Post season. Even if only adding them in as regular season stats, in 2013 Lester pitched 248 innings with a 3.45 ERA and a 19-9 record. Adding in 34 2/3 innings with 6 ER for Lester in 2013 from the post season impacts his raw results in a decisive manner and demonstrates his post season abilities, which are marked.

Masterson pitching two scoreless in 2013 vs TB in a game he didn't start. Those are the only post season records either has since the start of 2011 - advantage Lester.
Still waiting to hear how the advantage of pitching more innings in the playoffs offsets the disadvantage of additional wear and tear on the arm.


3. Velocity changes. Actually in opposition to what you claimed Lester's FB speed has varied about 2.5x less then Masterson's since 2008, and Masterson has had two years with well more sizable dips from year to year than Lesters "worst" year. So, that's an advantage, not a disadvantage for Lester vs Masterson.
I thought that getting good results with less than stellar stuff was notable. Now it's an advantage for Lester?





I had about 2.5 minutes to deal with finishing the post when I thought up looking them up since no numbers were provided (did you run out of time too?), saw two good years and two bad, posted numbers which were not false, nor with a claim outside of that he had two good years. You already stated he sucked, I don't think anyone was taken in by my post - if that's what you were worried about, but it's good to know that you care. BTW, you did not provide any data, just an opinion, that's awfully subjective of someone that lives and dies by metrics....
What?
You're talking about 'two good years and two bad' while I make a quantitative statement - Masterson's ERA is higher when pitching to Santana - and now you're trying to say that I'm only providing an opinion?



It's an early trend, and in every walk of life I've been in since diapers, trends need to be paid attention too. In addition to just being a trend - it's DATA - making it holy (I mean in a purely mathematical sense of course) - thus what else can we do but count it?
Is it a 'trend' or is it small sample noise?


Hueristics.
So, no, you don't know how to count them as value?


The fact that they traded a promising young LHP for a 33 year old DH coming off of 3 years of: 111, 112, 116 OPS+ (games played: 95, 142, 115) - yes, it's evidence - naturally.
Pretty weak evidence.
Teams make poor trades all the time.


I was there, Boston was a very sour place indeed and young pitchers were at particular risk for getting chewed out and spit out. These guys in particular were getting hammered by the fans and press.
Not particularly by opposing batters, which is what I'd be concerned about, so far as I can tell given the limited amount that I've looked into it.


By your measurements and vision seemingly.
Yes.
?
What else would I use?




Your kind of logic ends up with an inexpensive team of mildly above average players performance wise that don't beat aces often and don't win playoff series often.
Citation requested
Does your kind of logic end up with a team that beats aces often and wins playoff series often?
Curious to hear this one.


Fine turn of phrase. I don't think Masterson is as good as Lester in Boston. Might he be 86% as good over the next 4 years? Sure. Might he cost 73% as much as Lester? Sure. The question is - is a players value absolutely tied to stats and nothing else? You seem to be saying so, and I'll pay the 27% premium for 14% better performance.
Depends what the team does with the 27% they saved. If that leads to an upgrade higher than the 14% that Lester is better than Masterson then it's the better deal.



There a good deal of posts and rhetoric since that time, let's go back in time... No I don't believe Lester is going to get 6/144 and Masterson 6/94. I'd say Lester gets 5/112.5 and Masterson gets 5/82.5 if the projections are on. That's $30M over 5, $6M per. Put it this way, it's not ridiculous to go either way. I prefer Lester for reasons mostly given already, you two like Masterson based on price/performance. Thankfully the choice has to be made in the matrix of dozens of other choices and not just this single "all other things being equal" way that you are posing it.
I think you're actually the one pretending that all other things are equal.
The advantage of signing Lester is to specifically NOT make all other things equal - using the money saved to change another part of the team.



BTW, since we are musing here, tell me that the Red Sox win the WS in 2013 with Masterson instead of Lester. Can you do it? Curious to hear this one.
Yes, I can do it. The Red Sox would have won the 2013 WS with Masterson instead of Lester.

No, I can't do it. Just as I can't say that the Red Sox would win the 2013 WS with Lester if we could go back in time and replay the 2013 season.

I don't see any evidence that, going into the 2013 season, Masterson instead of Lester would have significantly decreased the Red Sox' chance of winning.

bagwell368
04-16-2014, 12:36 PM
IMO it's overly simplistic to suggest that the ONLY reason that the Sox don't sign him is that they are overly cheap.

Matt Cain would probably be the closest comp to Lester if Lester signed an extension early this season. Cain got a 5/107.5 or 6/120 extension (buy-out or team option). He was younger by a 1.5 years, but had pitched 160 more innings of ML ball at the same point in time. Cain also pitches in the best pitchers division in the ML, Lester the worst. I suggest Lester is either equal to Cain or superior at the same point in time of these extensions (or possible extension). Thus an offer of 4/70 is CHEAP and unreasonable compared to Cain's deal considering Lester isn't some drunken party boy (Buchholz early on), or emotionally explosive like Ortiz - instead a gentleman who goes out and does his job and never takes the opportunity to take a shot at teammates, coaches, or owners.

bagwell368
04-16-2014, 01:30 PM
What?
You're talking about 'two good years and two bad' while I make a quantitative statement - Masterson's ERA is higher when pitching to Santana - and now you're trying to say that I'm only providing an opinion?

YOU provided the first opinion on Santana, sans data in post #107:

"Well...Masterson has thrown a lot of innings to Santana whose not exactly a Molina behind the plate himself." I pulled out two data slices.

I then posted in #108:

"Between '11 & '13 Santana caught him for a total of 272 innings for a 3.50 ERA, not very good in '10 and '12"

I didn't say "two bad" I said "not very good in '10 and '12.

Then you put more complete data in #109, including a gratuitous insult.


Pretty weak evidence.

Excuse me, you brought up Easler as a player of substantial implied value (in terms of Tudor) After quoting Won-Loss records to "prove" how good the 3 pitchers were. I sliced a fair size hole in that notion with *wait for it* - actual stats. Now it's "weak evidence" and your original claim is brushed under the carpet.


Yes.
?
What else would I use?

Not a big one for detecting subtlety... It means that's all you see. However the vexing thing for you there is more to the game of baseball that has been quantified to date, and it will never be fully quantified.


Citation requested

Use your logic to its logical and final conclusion. A 9th grader should be able to see the import.


Does your kind of logic end up with a team that beats aces often and wins playoff series often?
Curious to hear this one.

I believe in a mixed roster: young and cheap, old and cheap, old and expensive, mid career with pricing all over the map. A well staffed minor league system to use for trades to patch holes, and staff the roster.


Depends what the team does with the 27% they saved. If that leads to an upgrade higher than the 14% that Lester is better than Masterson then it's the better deal.

Reductionist - and the actual wins may not follow the WAR due to the nature of pitchers having such relatively few outings. When playing bridge it's useful to have the K-J-9, but more useful to have the A-10-2 if they are played at the right time.


Yes, I can do it. The Red Sox would have won the 2013 WS with Masterson instead of Lester.

WOULD? I can buy "could" 1 out 10 times? Sure. 10 out of 10? 5 out of 10? No. For one thing - Masterson has never started a post season game.

Can't wait for fans of the game and not just the numbers to think on this claim.


I don't see any evidence that, going into the 2013 season, Masterson instead of Lester would have significantly decreased the Red Sox' chance of winning.

Let's say they arrived at the post season with the same total of wins, what in Masterson's history indicates he was going to perform the same as Lester in the playoffs? This is bootstrapping taken to a ridiculous and untenable level.

filihok
04-16-2014, 01:55 PM
YOU provided the first opinion on Santana, sans data in post #107:
Sure. I posted an opinion, based upon data, on Santana but did not present the data.


Excuse me, you brought up Easler as a player of substantial implied value (in terms of Tudor) After quoting Won-Loss records to "prove" how good the 3 pitchers were. I sliced a fair size hole in that notion with *wait for it* - actual stats. Now it's "weak evidence" and your original claim is brushed under the carpet.
What?
I said Tudor was traded for Easler and that I wasn't going to delve through the entire state of the Red Sox at the time in order to attempt to guess at their thinking.
Teams make 'bad' trades all the time.
Tudor being traded for Easler is very weak evidence that Tudor couldn't handle pitching in Fenway or Boston.
Boston may have believed Tudor couldn't handle it, but that doesn't mean that it was the case.
Or they could have traded him for any number of other reasons.


Not a big one for detecting subtlety... It means that's all you see. However the vexing thing for you there is more to the game of baseball that has been quantified to date, and it will never be fully quantified.
Sure. Of course there are things that aren't quantified. However, everything that isn't quantified doesn't automatically fit your side of the argument. It could just as easily be contrary to your argument.


Use your logic to its logical and final conclusion.
I don't believe that any team often beats an ace nor often wins playoff series.
So, that's hardly a criticism of one way of constructing a roster.


I believe in a mixed roster: young and cheap, old and cheap, old and expensive, mid career with pricing all over the map. A well staffed minor league system to use for trades to patch holes, and staff the roster.
The idea is to get the most performance out of your team.
Germane to this discussion is whether the difference in amounts paid for Lester and Masterson would make up for the difference in performance between the two.


Reductionist - and the actual wins may not follow the WAR due to the nature of pitchers having such relatively few outings.
Sure. So a team with Masterson might win more games than a team with Lester - thought that is slightly less likely than a team with Lester winning more games than a team with Lester.


WOULD? I can buy "could" 1 out 10 times? Sure. 10 out of 10? 5 out of 10? No. For one thing - Masterson has never started a post season game.
So?
Maybe he's one of these mythical pitchers who steps up his game.
Again, just because something is not quantified doesn't mean that it automatically benefits your argument.



Let's say they arrived at the post season with the same total of wins, what in Masterson's history indicates he was going to perform the same as Lester in the playoffs?
Nearly equivalent recent performance.

RedSoxtober
04-16-2014, 01:59 PM
Thus an offer of 4/70 is CHEAP and unreasonable compared to Cain's deal considering Lester isn't some drunken party boy (Buchholz early on), or emotionally explosive like Ortiz - instead a gentleman who goes out and does his job and never takes the opportunity to take a shot at teammates, coaches, or owners.

I didn't say that the reported offer wasn't cheap but rather objected to the assertion that "if the Red Sox don't sign Lester it's only because they are cheap." I agree that $70M/4yrs is cheap and unrealistic; I don't agree that the ONLY reason they don't sign Lester before Opening Day 2015 is because they are cheap.

RedSoxtober
04-16-2014, 02:09 PM
Let's say they arrived at the post season with the same total of wins, what in Masterson's history indicates he was going to perform the same as Lester in the playoffs?
Sure. I posted an opinion, based upon data, on Santana but did not present the data.
Nearly equivalent recent performance.
Does it matter that Masterson was injured in his last start (9/2/13) and only pitched 3.2IP of relief in late September?

RaginRondo17
04-16-2014, 02:36 PM
If we could get a big bat prospect at the Corner OF or Corner INF spot, I'd trade Lester off in a second at deadline. I would exhaust all options with extension though, I like Lester a lot, but not worth overpaying with all our young pitching prospect and when we could throw money at somebody younger on the open market.

-Lavigne43-
04-16-2014, 07:09 PM
What's the big deal, each season you want to look at has 3 starts followed by 3 starts, etc. It's the most recent sample we have, and with BR's multi year averaging abilities, when you grab 2011 and up, viola! there it is. Last year when Drew missed ST, there was a lot written about how to count his first 10-12 games, and a lot written about Napoli at around the 15 game mark. 3 starts is basically 1/11 of the season, for a positional player that plays 155 games, 14 games is 1/11. So it's OK to talk about a hitter after 14 games (or less) because "14" sounds more than "3" when it's the same thing for each type of player? Ummm. No.



That's an interesting conjecture, but has zero basis in fact AFAWK. I also reject your regular season findings as incomplete view because:

1. The AL East and AL Central with the Sox and Indians removed leaves the East with better hitting, pitching, and more offensive parks than in the Central. Even adjusted stats may understate the impact of those things.

2. Post season. Even if only adding them in as regular season stats, in 2013 Lester pitched 248 innings with a 3.45 ERA and a 19-9 record. Adding in 34 2/3 innings with 6 ER for Lester in 2013 from the post season impacts his raw results in a decisive manner and demonstrates his post season abilities, which are marked.

Masterson pitching two scoreless in 2013 vs TB in a game he didn't start. Those are the only post season records either has since the start of 2011 - advantage Lester.

3. Velocity changes. Actually in opposition to what you claimed Lester's FB speed has varied about 2.5x less then Masterson's since 2008, and Masterson has had two years with well more sizable dips from year to year than Lesters "worst" year. So, that's an advantage, not a disadvantage for Lester vs Masterson.

4. Pitching Coach changes. Even though Masterson had his "bum" catcher too, he didn't have the 5 different coaches in 4 years - the middle two years with pitching coaches - all of them failures here. McClure didn't even talk to his Mgr, wonder if he talked to his pitchers? Didn't look like he did anything useful with them even if he had talked to them.



The Sox decision can only be judged in hindsight, but as I pointed out 3 starts for a SP is the effectively the same thing as 14 games for an everyday player that plays 155 games.



I guess you missed the two times I mentioned the 4 years in a row of 5 different pitching coaches. That's a lot of churn, more than Masterson has had to face. Let me put more meaning around that. There was never anything along the lines of injury (shoulder, wrist, elbow, back, etc.) to account for the period that Lester did not pitch well in those years. However he lost some velocity and his pitches didn't have the same bite, which says to me grip and wrist snap - two fine points pitchers are always grappling with. A good attentive coach can catch a player falling off from normal quite quickly, a disinterested/stupid coach will tend not to. A catcher with as little on the ball as Salty, can't help either, and in two seasons seemed in particular seemed to hurt a good deal. Last year Salty did better because he took a lot more calls from the dugout than he had the two prior years.



Don't put words in my mouth, I never said "all" that's your word.



He gets none? Based on what? I say he gets some and possibly a lot based on stats, and observations.



Are you a big league pitcher? How do you know? The things that can bedevil an ace are often times very subtle. There is NO damage to Lester's body from these down times, so then it appears almost for sure it wasn't a physical issues of Lesters. If he had a UCL injury or whatever, he'd have to be downrated, but he didn't.



Again the use of the word "all". The inanity of this claim is beyond "all" bounds. Pitchers like what works and what they are used to. If Lester is used to not arguing with his catcher because it bothers his concentration and sangfroid on the mound - he won't and there is nothing remotely near "too heavily" about it. Some pitchers talk a lot - after games with the Catcher and Coach. Some just want to throw. Lester won us the WS last year, no other ace last year put up anything like he did in the post season. He faced down cancer, won game 4 of the WS in 2007 as a kid. That's a pretty decent resume. You feel free to tell him he should shake off his catchers more. Good luck.



If Masterson is such a wonder, how come he couldn't overcome his catching pariah? He must have relied too heavily on him... That's *sarcasm* not an actual claim. Maybe you missed it, but more and more the Manager or Pitching Coach calls games. I'm quite sure that Vazquez gets here, he'll be doing the same. The days of the Varitek maybe coming to a close, except in the case of the special few. Ross is one of those old time Yoda catchers, I sure hope they bring up Vazquez at least by Sep 1 to learn more from him.



Does his not belonging to that club mean that Masterson does? Lester is one of the 12 best SP's in the ML since 2008, and has notable playoff success - and that makes him an ace. Masterson isn't an ace. He might be a 2A (top half of the 2nd's) - that's real good.



I'm not familiar with Cafardo's piece, I've been very busy lately. I always liked Masterson and I was on record against the deal that traded him. If Lester and he were on the starting staff in two years and everyone else on it now was gone replaced by others, I'd be fine.



Farrell was not the pitching coach when he was brought in to Manage.

Pitching Coaches:

2010: Farrell (good)
2011: Young (not so hot, not invited back)
2012: McClure & Niemann (not so good, not invited back)
2013: Nieves (good and steady)



Lester's 2011 was worse than all 3 years before it. It was good, not excellent.



Yup he had is only below lg average year of his career - Masterson has 4, working on 5.



At least you didn't use to word "all". Lester did not have an ERA of infinity. Back in the offseason when Lester and the catchers were being gone over with a fine tooth comb, one of the SABR's that posts here and I came to agree that Salty was at least 15 if not 20% worse than the other catchers. Call him 17.5%, and call the Pitching coach 7.5% - that's 25% add that to his 87 ERA+ and he's in the same area as his ERA+ as 2011.



Ohhhh, fear mongering.... you could say that about any pitcher, thus it has no meaning unless you have a specific example connected to Lester.



Lester has always been more about location and deception that outright speed. He's no Randy.

Masterson has an 8.8 K/9 rate this year, not helping him too much right now.



So you support Theo's bum for $1M * 15 guys and see what shakes out in ST?



Lackey was signed for more in a lesser market with many more questions about his shoulder, and he was at best a 1B ace, more a 2A. Beckett was great when he was healthy and he battled weight problems and he got inked for a nice extension in a lesser market. ****ING Homer Baily got a bigger pile. What's Lester done wrong? Be a soft spoken team player that axes opponents in the playoffs - what a crummy resume....



OK, so no Lester, no Peavy, Buchholz on the DL as usual, Lackey pissed at having to play at $500k, trick or treat Duobront, Workman, and "the kid"... that's our staff next year? So we're talking bridge year, because SV, Napoli, Ortiz, etc. will be collecting SSDI (SS disabilty)... BC won't make a big plungs on a big hitter... Can Lester cover all that? No, But a staff headed by Lester and Masterson has a heft to it that would be helpful. Now if BC figures it's 3 more years before we're back in? Sure cash in Lester. Fans are not dumb. The Sox can do few wrongs this year, but next year the long knives will be out if the team doesn't spend.



Right, just stay quiet.

Who says it's alright to judge a position player on 14 games? I don't respect the opinion of anyone who does that. It's different when it's put in the context of "what happens if this guy continues to struggle" Everyone on this site has watched enough baseball and have witnessed many players getting off to amazing starts, only to end up having bad overall seasons, and vice versa. Just look at the leaderboards and you will find a mix of known top level players and nobodies. If Masterson has a lousy season he won't be effecting the decision on Lester.

Yes, it's complete speculation because we don't know what they are thinking. Based on the way they have acted the last few years after 2011, they are very cautious to invest heavily into one player. Pitchers are riskier than position players, I'm sure they are much more hesitant to sign a pitcher to a big deal. Scherzer, Shields, those alternatives are too expensive to make sense. Masterson recently tried to sign a team friendly deal with the Indians and they low balled him. I think they offered him 2 years and a team option at a very low price. The Red Sox have tried to trade for him multiple times in the past. They definitely have an eye on him. So they figure Lester's price is not going to get much higher, lets see how he performs this year, lets see how other options perform this year and figure out how much each player is worth. Then they decide if we are better off signing Lester, or saving a lot of money and signing Masterson, or maybe a trade could pop up.

I thought I was clear that I think Lester is the better pitcher despite Masterson having pretty much the same statistics the last 3 seasons. Overall he has faced tougher offenses, has performed well in the playoffs, and has a longer track record. It's not like the Tigers are mince meat though and the Orioles were really the only big offensive force in the AL East last year. Still in a situation where they only go after one pitcher, how big the price difference will likely be the deciding factor.

I think you are misreading Masterson's velocity numbers. His sinker and fastball flip flop based on which he used more often, some of those pitches could be miscategorized too. Anyways, since he became a SP in 2010 his average fastball velocity has been 92.4, 93.1, 92.8, 93.1. His sinkers average velocity has gone 90.6, 92, 91.7, 91.1. Yes his velocity is down in 3 starts this season, his pitching coach says it is a mechanical issue that will be fixed. We'll see, obviously if his velocity is way down all season his attractiveness would go way down as well.

Farrell wasn't the pitching coach, but there is a comfort factor there and I would be shocked if he didn't have significant input. McClure was terrible. Curt Young isn't really a bad pitching coach, just happened to be a bad fit. Hes done a fine job with the A's and they were very happy to get him back. It's just during that season Lester and the other pitchers were unprofessional and took advantage of the freedom and leniency Tito and Young gave them. They did not keep up with their conditioning without someone like Farrell breathing down their neck, which is why they all bombed at the end of the year. Tito, Young, and the head athletic trainer were the scapegoats because of the pitchers poor work ethics that year. I think Lester has matured significantly since that year, it didn't take him long to stop following Beckett around like a puppy. If Young was our pitching coach right now I don't think it would be a problem.

You made it sound like Lester would not have declined at all if Salty wasn't catching him and he never had a different pitching coach. I don't think it's possible to determine how much that effected him. Can't we easily turn that around and say his numbers were made better than he actually was by having a terrific catcher in Varitek and a terrific pitching coach in Farrell? Salty was a negative behind the plate, but I think how much influence over a pitchers performance one catcher has compared to any other catcher is a huge question that can not be answered easily.

Fear mongering? No, it's just like you said, you can say that about any pitcher, which is why there is a lot of risk involved with giving a pitcher over 30 a long deal. This is why the Red Sox might prefer to go with a lesser talented/established pitcher on a much shorter deal. Pitching is so hard to project, the only way you can avoid getting burned is to only sign short length deals, and obviously the talented pitchers want none of that. Who would expect someone like Bronson Arroyo to age well with his Buchholz like body?

Lester was one of the most dominating pitchers in baseball during 2009 when he had a 9.96 K/9 and a 2.83 BB/9, he was unlucky with the era. After that season he was a guy you could think of as a future Cy Young award winner. Then his walks climbed the next couple seasons and you wondered what was causing that since it was the only thing holding him back. Then his K's started falling along with his walks. It makes you question if the K's will continue to fall or if they will settle where they are now. If the BB's jump up again he will have a tough season without the amount of K's he used to get. It's very tough to get a read on Lester. He goes on these long streaks during the season where he is either bad or very good.

Lester did nothing wrong except have bad timing. He is the next pitcher in line for a new contract after the Red Sox have been burned by several expensive contracts, and just as the price for pitchers has risen dramatically. The Red Sox right now might be too risk averse that they won't take a contract that is even at a good value for Lester.

There's a ton of turnover coming with this team, the team will look very different in a couple years. A lot of positions will be open to spend money on. The Red Sox will have money and they will have pieces in the farm, they can go many different directions. It is scary to think of Clay being the cornerstone of the rotation. I would still be surprised if nothing gets done with Lester. He's too valuable right now in the immediate short term to lose. With the way contracts are soaring it could be a very good value in a couple years, even if he is only a mid rotation type performer in the later years of the contract. Masterson I think is a target to replace Peavy if none of the kids step up and show they can fill that spot, or if Doubront bombs.

bagwell368
04-16-2014, 09:37 PM
Yes his velocity is down in 3 starts this season, his pitching coach says it is a mechanical issue that will be fixed. We'll see, obviously if his velocity is way down all season his attractiveness would go way down as well.

Well like I said, I wasn't counting any pitchers velocity this early - just results, and obviously just up to a point.


Farrell wasn't the pitching coach, but there is a comfort factor there and I would be shocked if he didn't have significant input.

Certainly, but change even from "bad" to "good" means time spent less effectively for some period of time as they feel each other out then it would be with the same pitching coach all 4 years.


McClure was terrible. Curt Young isn't really a bad pitching coach, just happened to be a bad fit. Hes done a fine job with the A's and they were very happy to get him back.

I heard the same thing, but like players some coaches don't do as well in some places.


You made it sound like Lester would not have declined at all if Salty wasn't catching him and he never had a different pitching coach. I don't think it's possible to determine how much that effected him.

It's possible to determine how Salty did vs other catchers. In November 2013 I wrote this post:

Salty vs Experienced Catchers on BoSox 2011-2013 for all pitchers:

Year Name ERA ERA+

2011 JTek 3.57 ~121
2011 Salty 4.62 ~093 That's +0.95 and +28 ERA+ for Salty

2012 Shop 3.77 ~113
2012 Salty 4.84 ~088 That's +1.07 ERA and +25 ERA+ for Salty

2013 Ross 2.89 ~140*
2013 Salty 3.84 ~108 That's +0.95 and +32 ERA+ for Salty

* Added in playoff stats.

So 3 year average at about 28% worse by ERA+ than the other vet catcher on the staff (Lavarnway helps make Salty look good, but he's a AAAA catcher). All 3 years clustered right around each other. Yes, I think we can conclude that Salty had a terrible effect on the entire staff including Lester - but maybe they were all weak mentally because they didn't shake him off more - is that still the theory?


Can't we easily turn that around and say his numbers were made better than he actually was by having a terrific catcher in Varitek and a terrific pitching coach in Farrell?

Not when 3 other catchers (ancient Tek, Ross, and Shoppach) all did much better in the 3 year window that Salty played here). That's the difference between a professional catcher and a guy that puts on catcher gear, but isn't really a fit catcher for a team with the budget of the Sox.


Salty was a negative behind the plate, but I think how much influence over a pitchers performance one catcher has compared to any other catcher is a huge question that can not be answered easily.

I just gave you data which correlates well with what has been said about Salty around here since he got here. He's a hitter that wasn't good enough to play in LF or 1B, so they tried to make a catcher out of him.


This is why the Red Sox might prefer to go with a lesser talented/established pitcher on a much shorter deal.

And outside of end of the road guys like say Peavy and Lackey in two years, you'll be outbid - plain and simple.


Pitching is so hard to project, the only way you can avoid getting burned is to only sign short length deals, and obviously the talented pitchers want none of that. Who would expect someone like Bronson Arroyo to age well with his Buchholz like body?[QUOTE]

He doesn't throw hard, and he has played in a generally weak division.

[QUOTE]Lester was one of the most dominating pitchers in baseball during 2009 when he had a 9.96 K/9 and a 2.83 BB/9, he was unlucky with the era. After that season he was a guy you could think of as a future Cy Young award winner.

Lesters finishes in rWAR top 10:

2008 - 4
2009 - 5
2010 - 3
2011 - 9

Check into how many other SP's have 4 or more top 9 finishes since 2008. It's very few. I don't know why Lester has to win a Cy to prove himself. I don't know why Lester can demonstrate he suffered no arm damage during his few down times, and still be treated by his own FO like he's some fading leper.


Then his walks climbed the next couple seasons and you wondered what was causing that since it was the only thing holding him back. Then his K's started falling along with his walks. It makes you question if the K's will continue to fall or if they will settle where they are now.

Enough with the hand wringing. There is nothing wrong with Lester that wasn't almost all tied up in Salty and his pitching coaches. Show me the DL stints, show me the big drop in velocity like Lincecum - he still got stupid money for two big top 10 WAR finishes and a rag arm. Show me the guy that divorced his wife when she came down with breast cancer.


Lester did nothing wrong except have bad timing. He is the next pitcher in line for a new contract after the Red Sox have been burned by several expensive contracts, and just as the price for pitchers has risen dramatically. The Red Sox right now might be too risk averse that they won't take a contract that is even at a good value for Lester.

Then they are idiots and they will be burned for it.


There's a ton of turnover coming with this team, the team will look very different in a couple years. A lot of positions will be open to spend money on. The Red Sox will have money and they will have pieces in the farm, they can go many different directions. It is scary to think of Clay being the cornerstone of the rotation. I would still be surprised if nothing gets done with Lester. He's too valuable right now in the immediate short term to lose. With the way contracts are soaring it could be a very good value in a couple years, even if he is only a mid rotation type performer in the later years of the contract. Masterson I think is a target to replace Peavy if none of the kids step up and show they can fill that spot, or if Doubront bombs.

Yeah great idea to let your 2nd best LHP of all time walk away with a feeble effort to retain him. I've been a very close fan of this team since 1966 and I'd like anyone to point out a pitcher that's more "in" the program than Lester, and this is his reward? Should have been a dick wad like Ortiz.

Buchholz will never be the cornerstone of this rotation for more than 14 starts in a row followed by a year of BS.

RedSoxtober
04-17-2014, 08:53 AM
You made it sound like Lester would not have declined at all if Salty wasn't catching him and he never had a different pitching coach. I don't think it's possible to determine how much that effected him. Can't we easily turn that around and say his numbers were made better than he actually was by having a terrific catcher in Varitek and a terrific pitching coach in Farrell? Salty was a negative behind the plate, but I think how much influence over a pitchers performance one catcher has compared to any other catcher is a huge question that can not be answered easily.

The point made in the past was that you could compare his results with Salty against those with the other catchers in the rotation (Tek, Ross, and even Lavarnway) and his performance with Salty was worse by a pretty wide margin. There's no guarantee that Lester would have been on his career marks with another catcher but there's pretty strong correlation that suggests he was detrimental.

filihok
04-17-2014, 11:50 AM
Re-ran the numbers (by hand for the playoffs - hopefully no mistakes)

Lester 2011-2013 TOTAL
645 IP, 2712 PA, 8.1 BB%, 20.4 K%, 3.89 ERA, 4.10 RA, 3.80 FIP, 3.91 kwERA, .250/.316/.396 = 4.18 r/g

Lester with Salty
403.7 IP, 1720 PA, 7.5 BB%, 20.7 K%, 4.17 ERA, 4.19 RA, 3.91 FIP, 3.83 kwERA, .260/.324/.416 = 4.52 r/g

Lester sans Salty
241.3 IP, 992 PA, 9.1 BB%, 19.7 K%, 3.43 ERA, 3.96 RA, 3.63 FIP, 4.06 kwERA, .233/.303/.361 = 3.62 r/6


Interesting that Lester had better K and BB numbers when Salty was behind than dish than when he wasn't.

Lester's ERA was 21% higher with Salty than without
Lester's Runs Allowed was 6% higher with Salty than without
Did the rest of the Red Sox defense perform worse when Salty was behind the dish? Did Salty himself create that many unearned runs? Sample size noise?

Lester's FIP was 8% higher with Salty behind the plate
Lester's kwERA was 6% lower with Salty behind the plate
kwERA estimates ERA using only strikeouts and walks. The difference between kwERA and FIP is home runs.
Did Salty's catching lead to Lester surrendering more home runs? Was Salty's playing time skewed towards games when home runs were more likely? Sample size noise?

Lester's expected runs allowed based on OBP/SLG was 25% higher with Salty catching.
Again, a large part of this was the number of home runs allowed as well as a higher rate of hits.
Was this due to Salty's pitch calling? Was this due to Salty playing more often in higher offense environments? Sample size noise?

Averaging the runs allowed metrics together (ERA, RA, FIP, kwERA and R/G) we get the Red Sox and Lester giving up about 11% more runs with Salty doing the catching.

Wojo
04-17-2014, 05:40 PM
If the Sox traded Lester for Masterson and they both agreed to the same contract extension with their new teams how would you feel.....thats all their is to it. Being a Yankees fan I would love it!

Bo Sox Fan
04-17-2014, 06:36 PM
I'm not opposed to signing both Lester and Masterson next winter, they both eat a ton of productive innings and there is alot of money coming off the books with Lackey's league minimum kicking in, Peavy, Gomes, Pierzynski, Ross etc... Deal Buchholz this winter in a Stanton deal.

Lester
Lackey
Masterson
Doubront
Owens/Workman

-Lavigne43-
04-17-2014, 06:43 PM
The point made in the past was that you could compare his results with Salty against those with the other catchers in the rotation (Tek, Ross, and even Lavarnway) and his performance with Salty was worse by a pretty wide margin. There's no guarantee that Lester would have been on his career marks with another catcher but there's pretty strong correlation that suggests he was detrimental.

Yes, I've seen those numbers plenty of times. I think it's an overly simplified approach to answer a complex question. The difference in era is just a starting point to investigate whether Salty was significantly detrimental to the pitching staff, not a conclusion.

First I would ask what is normal around the league. As the primary catcher Salty caught 1,004 regular season innings (69%) in 2013, 852 innings (59%) in 2012, and 856 innings (59%) in 2011. Is it normal for the starting catcher who catches that percent of the innings to have a higher pitchers era than the backups? Backups have much more time to prepare for the opponent they are expected to face, and they have more time to work with that individual pitcher. They start less, so they are also less likely to be the catcher on those random days that a pitcher just has nothing and gets walloped, or those days you just face a steaming hot offense. If you removed all of the blowups from the data would the difference be closer? Backups also tend to be more defensive minded, guys who don't start because their bats are terrible.

What starters is the backup catcher catching? The top level established pitchers can tend to gravitate towards using the backup as a personal catcher, especially when they have a good start and don't want to change anything. By my memory, Varitek almost exclusively caught Beckett in 2011, and he had a fantastic overall season. Salty caught Wakefield exclusively, we all thanked God when Wakefield retired after that season. Is the starting catcher playing a higher percentage of games vs the top teams in the league? Are they more likely to play Salty because of his bat when playing an explosive offense like the Rangers? Are they giving him a day off more often when playing a bad team like the Mariners?

We need more info than era, we know era by itself can mask a pitchers true performance. Is the pitcher striking out less batters with one catcher? Walking more? Stranding less runners? More line drives? More homers? Is the pitch selection different between catchers? What exactly is the cause of the difference?

We need significantly more info to definitively say that Salty had this large negative effect on the pitchers, lots of info I am probably neglecting or didn't think of. None of us have the time for that, but I'm sure it's the type of stuff they research in front offices. Think of the huge advantage it would be if you could look around the league and say "hey, this pitchers numbers got dragged down by his catcher. Lets acquire him for significantly less than what he is worth, and he will perform much better on our team."

Bo Sox Fan
04-17-2014, 07:05 PM
While on topic of catchers, there's a pretty damn good defensive one on the farm being compared to Yadier Molina that can only help Lester going forward.

The Christian Vasquez show starts in 2014.

bagwell368
04-17-2014, 09:14 PM
FYI:

Speaking of sample sizes, since July 23, 2013, Lester in 137.1 IP including the first 4 innings tonight and the playoffs has a unadjusted ERA of 2.62

Masterson since 7/21/13 and including playoffs and this year? 75* IP with a 3.36 ERA - unadjusted.

Adjust for park and the difficulty of playoff pitching and it's at least a .8 ERA advantage for Lester.

*Masterson's low inning total is due to an oblique injury, something Lester has had no trouble with.

bagwell368
04-17-2014, 09:41 PM
Yes, I've seen those numbers plenty of times. I think it's an overly simplified approach to answer a complex question. The difference in era is just a starting point to investigate whether Salty was significantly detrimental to the pitching staff, not a conclusion.

First I would ask what is normal around the league. As the primary catcher Salty caught 1,004 regular season innings (69%) in 2013, 852 innings (59%) in 2012, and 856 innings (59%) in 2011. Is it normal for the starting catcher who catches that percent of the innings to have a higher pitchers era than the backups?

No it is not common for starters to have worse ERA's with pitchers than subs. Salty did not catch an unusually large amount of games in those 3 years.


Backups have much more time to prepare for the opponent they are expected to face

Varitek had no problem preparing when he was in his prime and caught more innings then Salty a number of times to the betterment, not detriment of his pitchers.


and they have more time to work with that individual pitcher. They start less, so they are also less likely to be the catcher on those random days that a pitcher just has nothing and gets walloped, or those days you just face a steaming hot offense. If you removed all of the blowups from the data would the difference be closer? Backups also tend to be more defensive minded, guys who don't start because their bats are terrible.

This is a lot of supposition without any proof. Go look for yourself.


What starters is the backup catcher catching? The top level established pitchers can tend to gravitate towards using the backup as a personal catcher, especially when they have a good start and don't want to change anything.

More wandering around looking for ways to undo the facts. The fact in those 3 years is that Salty was an inferior defensive catcher to 3 different catchers. Tek in his final year was on fumes, worse on O then D, but a far cry from his peak. Ross is a defense first catcher, also two years from his likely retirement. In between we had an on average good, but not great defensive catcher closer to his peak, but still in his later years.


By my memory, Varitek almost exclusively caught Beckett in 2011, and he had a fantastic overall season. Salty caught Wakefield exclusively, we all thanked God when Wakefield retired after that season. Is the starting catcher playing a higher percentage of games vs the top teams in the league? Are they more likely to play Salty because of his bat when playing an explosive offense like the Rangers? Are they giving him a day off more often when playing a bad team like the Mariners?

Timing of starting for catchers has the most to do with when pitchers pitch, and when there are day games after night games than just about all other reasons. Playing Texas or KC tends to have not much to do with it.


We need more info than era, we know era by itself can mask a pitchers true performance.

In November I dug up the slashes of these guys, and it was quite in lock step with the ERA across the board.


Is the pitcher striking out less batters with one catcher? Walking more? Stranding less runners? More line drives? More homers? Is the pitch selection different between catchers? What exactly is the cause of the difference?

Until you find out, you'll have to accept the data I've put forth, ignore the whole thing, or get more yourself.


We need significantly more info to definitively say that Salty had this large negative effect on the pitchers

I don't see it. Even one of the SABR scolds were clear enough on all of it to say that Salty was 15% worse then the other 3 catchers for sure, and maybe more. If we factor in the playoffs Ross puts an empathetic strangle hold on Salty. That 15% or 27% the ERA shows or somewhere in the middle improves Lesters numbers so much so that the notion of Masterson as being some near comp (adjusted for $) is hammered.


lots of info I am probably neglecting or didn't think of. None of us have the time for that, but I'm sure it's the type of stuff they research in front offices. Think of the huge advantage it would be if you could look around the league and say "hey, this pitchers numbers got dragged down by his catcher. Lets acquire him for significantly less than what he is worth, and he will perform much better on our team."

Quite so, which is why IMO catching is THE only position where you want to have top 3rd defensive players and hang the offense, no other position do I say that for. Catching clearly is the hardest and most important position - harder and more important than SS.

I've seen a lot of catchers, and I can say that Johnny Bench, Gary Carter, and Yadier are the 3 best. Killer gloves that also can hit a bit. I'd them and others over the big bat/meh D guys anyday. Same with Tek in his prime. I can also say that the defensive metrics from either FG or BR are laughable at catcher. There is so much going on that it will never be fully quantified and mapped to a value that fully reflects the true value.

corky831
04-18-2014, 11:20 AM
Pay the damn man! He is a 100 million dollar pitcher easily. Top 6 LHP in the game based off of consistency. That offer stinks of LL so much it is not even funny! I'm not worried of how Lester will age.....he definitely is our Pettite and I could see him pitching until 40. Offer him 6/120 and call it a day. That is a discount in today's market.

filihok
04-18-2014, 06:36 PM
I don't see it. Even one of the SABR scolds were clear enough on all of it to say that Salty was 15% worse then the other 3 catchers for sure, and maybe more. If we factor in the playoffs Ross puts an empathetic strangle hold on Salty. That 15% or 27% the ERA shows or somewhere in the middle improves Lesters numbers so much so that the notion of Masterson as being some near comp (adjusted for $) is hammered.
:rolleyes:
By what method have you reached this conclusion?
Pretty poor form to apply a correction to one set of data (removing Salty's effect on Lester) while not doing the same to another set of data (Santana's effect on Masterson).

I posted this earlier in regards to Lester/Salty

Re-ran the numbers (by hand for the playoffs - hopefully no mistakes)

Lester 2011-2013 TOTAL
645 IP, 2712 PA, 8.1 BB%, 20.4 K%, 3.89 ERA, 4.10 RA, 3.80 FIP, 3.91 kwERA, .250/.316/.396 = 4.18 r/g

Lester with Salty
403.7 IP, 1720 PA, 7.5 BB%, 20.7 K%, 4.17 ERA, 4.19 RA, 3.91 FIP, 3.83 kwERA, .260/.324/.416 = 4.52 r/g

Lester sans Salty
241.3 IP, 992 PA, 9.1 BB%, 19.7 K%, 3.43 ERA, 3.96 RA, 3.63 FIP, 4.06 kwERA, .233/.303/.361 = 3.62 r/g


Interesting that Lester had better K and BB numbers when Salty was behind than dish than when he wasn't.

Lester's ERA was 21% higher with Salty than without

Lester's FIP was 8% higher with Salty behind the plate
Lester's kwERA was 6% lower with Salty behind the plate

Lester's expected runs allowed based on OBP/SLG was 25% higher with Salty catching.


Averaging the runs allowed metrics together (ERA, RA, FIP, kwERA and R/G) we get the Red Sox and Lester giving up about 11% more runs with Salty doing the catching.
*Note: I didn't do the RA calculation for Masterson because I realized that I pulled the wrong data for Lester and the actual data isn't available without substantial work.

Doing the same for Masterson/Santana from 2011-2013:

Masterson with Santana
374 IP, 1613 PA, 9.2% BB, 20.8% K, 4.09 ERA, 3.40 FIP, 4.04 kwERA, .253/.334/.347 = 4.04 r/g

Masterson without Santanta
241.3 IP, 1004 PA, 7.5% BB, 17.5 % K, 3.50 ERA, 3.83 FIP, 4.19 kwERA, .246/.314/.357 = 3.78 r/g

Masterson's ERA was 17% higher with Santana than without.

Masterson's FIP was 9% lower with Santana than without
Masterson's kwERA was 4% lower with Santana than without

Masterson's expected runs allowed based on OBP/SLG was 7% higher with Santana catching

Averaging the runs allowed metrics together (ERA, FIP, kwERA and R/G) we get the Indians and Masterson giving up about 3% more runs with Santana than without.

Let's compare Lester's non-Salty line to Masterson's non-Santana line:
Lester sans Salty
241.3 IP, 992 PA, 9.1 BB%, 19.7 K%, 3.43 ERA, 3.63 FIP, 4.06 kwERA, .233/.303/.361 = 3.62 r/g
Masterson without Santanta
241.3 IP, 1004 PA, 7.5% BB, 17.5 % K, 3.50 ERA, 3.83 FIP, 4.19 kwERA, .246/.314/.357 = 3.78 r/g

How is it that the notion of Masterson as some near comp is hammered?

bagwell368
04-18-2014, 09:41 PM
:rolleyes:
By what method have you reached this conclusion?

Could you be specific? I said several things in the quoted passage. The 15% comment came right out of your computer in 11/2013. The % stats were simply division with ERA+.


Pretty poor form to apply a correction to one set of data (removing Salty's effect on Lester) while not doing the same to another set of data (Santana's effect on Masterson).

You want to provide stats for Masterson, nobody is stopping you, and I see that you have, although there are flaws as I will elucidate.


How is it that the notion of Masterson as some near comp is hammered?

In 11/2013 you allowed for Lester's playoff stats to be included when looking at Salty and also Ross vs Salty in all of 2013 including the playoffs. Ross dominated Salty in the playoffs. But now in order to pursue your arguments at any cost you've decided that it's easier to leave them out since it makes Salty look worse, and Lester better. Talk about poor form. Oh sorry, I forgot SABR's don't think the sample size is big enough to matter... oh how droll - and yet in November you were fine with it. Odd, no?

You also continue to stonewall 2014 results, even though Lester and Masterson (today just now) are each 11.8% of the way through the regular season.

I wonder how you'd be if the numbers were the other way round? Since mid July Lester is the ace and Masterson is no better than a 2, and he also missed some innings. How does that effect Masterson's value and longevity an injury like that? Oops, no answer on the slide rule? But how else to explain Masterson's drop off? Santana in '13&'14 hasn't been so bad, about a 3.55 incuding this year. Gomes is only about .15-.20 less,

Masterson has an 8.8/5.3 K/BB ratio and a 4.57 ERA while
Lester has a 9.0/1.2 K/BB ratio and a 2.36 ERA.

Good form reigns supreme, eh?

BTW, since you want to be so precise, Masterson pitched 4 games last year (including playoffs) as a reliever, and as any good stat guy knows, RP's have lower ERA's since they don't pitch deep into pitch counts. Make sure you correct for that.

Also, I don't believe all your stats factor in the quality of the teams they face, and last time I checked the AL East has a more difficult env for pitchers than the AL Central.

Until you add in the playoffs for both (after all it's tougher to pitch in the playoffs), correct for the opponents, and include 2014 up to the minute any comparison of each from 2011-current is incomplete at least - if not biased.

Good form - right?

filihok
04-18-2014, 10:23 PM
Could you be specific?
I thought that I was
By what method have you reached the conclusion that Masterson was no near comp for Lester?


I said several things in the quoted passage. The 15% comment came right out of your computer in 11/2013. The % stats were simply division with ERA+.
That in no way compares Lester to Masterson.


In 11/2013 you allowed for Lester's playoff stats to be included when looking at Salty and also Ross vs Salty in all of 2013 including the playoffs. Ross dominated Salty in the playoffs. But now in order to pursue your arguments at any cost you've decided that it's easier to leave them out since it makes Salty look worse, and Lester better. Talk about poor form. Oh sorry, I forgot SABR's don't think the sample size is big enough to matter... oh how droll - and yet in November you were fine with it. Odd, no?
Yes, it is odd since:

Re-ran the numbers (by hand for the playoffs - hopefully no mistakes)



You also continue to stonewall 2014 results, even though Lester and Masterson (today just now) are each 11.8% of the way through the regular season.

I wonder how you'd be if the numbers were the other way round?

I didn't add it because
1) it was more work
2) Salty and Santana are not longer catching Lester and Masterson


How does that effect Masterson's value and longevity an injury like that?
I don't know. Do you?
Perhaps the decreased workload will make Masterson more effective and prolong his career. :shrug:


Santana in '13&'14 hasn't been so bad, about a 3.55 incuding this year. Gomes is only about .15-.20 less,
You couldn't be much more hypocritical if you tried.
I know that his was discussed in the other thread in November
In 2013 Lester's ERA with Salty was 3.58 (not much different than Masterson and Santana's 3.55)


(after all it's tougher to pitch in the playoffs)
Citation requested




You also continue to stonewall 2014 results, even though Lester and Masterson (today just now) are each 11.8% of the way through the regular season.

BTW, since you want to be so precise, Masterson pitched 4 games last year (including playoffs) as a reliever, and as any good stat guy knows, RP's have lower ERA's since they don't pitch deep into pitch counts. Make sure you correct for that.
Also, I don't believe all your stats factor in the quality of the teams they face, and last time I checked the AL East has a more difficult env for pitchers than the AL Central.

correct for the opponents, and include 2014 up to the minute any comparison of each from 2011-current is incomplete at least - if not biased.

Good form - right?
Have you done this?
Or, again, are you just assuming that everything not quantified lends itself to your side of the argument.

Feel free to make the adjustments that you feel I neglected





slide rule?
Yawn

ciaban
04-21-2014, 07:45 PM
IMO it's overly simplistic to suggest that the ONLY reason that the Sox don't sign him is that they are overly cheap. What if you signed Scherzer for more than what Lester would settle for? That's not being 'cheap'.

There are several nice options on the FA market who could be had on a shorter and/or less expensive deal (Cueto, Masterson, Price -- potential, Shields, Scherzer). That need not represent being cheap if it meant that you could spend more in other areas. For example, what if you signed Masterson for less and then traded for Stanton and handed him a contract that you couldn't have afforded if you'd signed Lester? Again, not cheap, just reallocating resources.


Both guys signed going into their age-29 season. Lester will be two years older and that is not insignificant. Neither is it insignificant that Lester will have thrown 120-200 more MLB regular season innings than both when he starts the new contract. Were Lester a couple years younger and with fewer IP there would be less concern.

How about a couple of other comps: Johan Santana and Cliff Lee. Santana signed an extension that began with his age 30 season and has roughly the same number of innings as Lester. He obviously had a much higher peak than Lester... but the valley he's walked through should be somewhat cautionary when considering extending an age 30+ pitcher. Lee signed heading into his age-32 season with fewer IP and while his performance in the NL has been very good (if down from the peak) the Phillies were still looking to get out from under the deal because of it's restraint on the club from making other deals to improve.


AAV is reasonable though I'd say 4-5 years is more favorable for the Sox. $22.5M is not much of a discount either.
It's not his contract that is holding them back, it's Howards, Cliff Lee put up an rWAR of 8.6 in 2011 and a 7.3 last year. He has been everything a team could ask for and more thus far.

bagwell368
04-21-2014, 10:21 PM
By what method have you reached the conclusion that Masterson was no near comp for Lester?

I included AS YOU DID in November '13 Lester's playoff performance from last year (and Masterson's as well). I've made that clear.

Since the most recent 3 years is considered the most useful in determining the future of a player by most (I believe your beloved projections put a lot of weight on that sort of thing too), I've added 2014 to the proceedings, if you want to be very exacting, you can drop off the the number of starts in 2014 from the start of 2011 to get and maintain that perfect 3 year window.


That in no way compares Lester to Masterson.

Of course it doesn't. I assumed you would make the simple logical jump that since catchers were being adjusted for in our prior discussions that they would be now - including Lester's time with his inferior (Salty) and superior catcher (Ross) and that that those comparisons for Lester as well as for Masterson would yield better results than just using raw numbers.


I didn't add it because
1) it was more work
2) Salty and Santana are not longer catching Lester and Masterson

Excuse me. I believe the topic at hand is if Masterson is a close comp to Lester - is that not so? Assuming you answer in the affirmative, you must then use a time frame to compare. I can't imagine you're only using 2014 since Masterson looks horrid and Lester looks like a top 3 Cy Young pitcher - so what is the time frame you are using, and if it goes back before 2014, then I'm afraid you'll have to provide the catcher data for each?

BTW, Santana did in fact catch one game for Masterson this season.


I don't know. Do you?
Perhaps the decreased workload will make Masterson more effective and prolong his career.

It's not an unusual injury, but when compared to a blemish free career of a pitcher such as Lester, there may be some GM's which attempt to "get over" on Masterson. Let me know when they get a metric for that.


Citation requested

Teams that get into the playoffs win more games than teams that don't - therefore even in the first round teams are better and playing for the goal they all have makes them tougher (WC games tend to have ace v ace). Getting into deeper rounds just increases the pressure and the quality of the teams being faced. Even a youngster of 13 could see the amount of pitching changes, best starting line-ups for almost every game, and such indicate an overall higher level of play.

Are a fan of the game - or just the stat sheet? Of course the most likely answer is found below...


Have you done this?

Or, again, are you just assuming that everything not quantified lends itself to your side of the argument.

I did everything I mentioned, except check the reliever vs starter stats on FG, but historically relievers have lower ERA's for obvious reasons (remember you have to observe the game, not just look up stats sometimes). Of course since we are talking I believe 4 appearances for an inning each, it's probably a minor difference if any, but, just to pay the stat troll, I thought it best to be complete.

BTW, by all means let's see everything non quantified Masterson has on his side?


Yawn

The yawn of it, is that you refuse to agree on very much related to baseball that doesn't come out of stat sheedt - in effect turning the game into some purely statistical study which it is not. Let me point out that - absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. Anyone that can't see the likelihood of increased difficulty of playoff baseball is either not a fan, or an perfectionist/abstructionist to any reasonable agreed on traits of the game.

I'm quite satisfied that Jon Lester from the start of 2011-today including playoffs is a notably better pitcher than Masterson. Further when factors such as Pitching Coach changes, AL East, park sizes, handedness, etc. that I've brought up give him a greater advantage in the market place than Masterson by a good deal.

Feel free to get the last word. It's a 97.87% certainty that you will.

RedSoxtober
04-22-2014, 08:58 AM
It's not his contract that is holding them back, it's Howards, Cliff Lee put up an rWAR of 8.6 in 2011 and a 7.3 last year. He has been everything a team could ask for and more thus far.

I said that "while his performance in the NL has been very good (if down from his peak) the Phillies were still looking to get out from under the deal". That's true even if you consider Howard to be the bigger problem. ANY big money contract can be a problem.

I'd also quibble a little with the idea that Lee has been everything a team could ask for and more thus far. I'd suggest that his 6-9 record in 2012 left something to be desired. Yes, his peripherals were still great but at $25M/yr he's got to be able to bring home the wins. While I generally agree that W-L is a bad way to measure a pitcher, at that kind of money he HAS to be a game changer.

filihok
04-22-2014, 08:28 PM
I included AS YOU DID in November '13 Lester's playoff performance from last year (and Masterson's as well). I've made that clear.
You haven't shown the data that supports your position.


Since the most recent 3 years is considered the most useful in determining the future of a player by most (I believe your beloved projections put a lot of weight on that sort of thing too), I've added 2014 to the proceedings, if you want to be very exacting, you can drop off the the number of starts in 2014 from the start of 2011 to get and maintain that perfect 3 year window.
Have you done this and presented the data? Or are you, again, just assuming that it works out to support the position that you have adopted and expect anyone involved in this thread to do the same?


Of course it doesn't. I assumed you would make the simple logical jump that since catchers were being adjusted for in our prior discussions that they would be now - including Lester's time with his inferior (Salty) and superior catcher (Ross) and that that those comparisons for Lester as well as for Masterson would yield better results than just using raw numbers.
What are you talking about?
I'm the one that suggested that comparing Lester's adjusted stats to Masterson's adjusted stats would give a better comparison, remember?
By what fault in logic are you now saying that I didn't make the 'logical jump' that doing so would yield better results?


Excuse me. I believe the topic at hand is if Masterson is a close comp to Lester - is that not so? Assuming you answer in the affirmative, you must then use a time frame to compare. I can't imagine you're only using 2014 since Masterson looks horrid and Lester looks like a top 3 Cy Young pitcher - so what is the time frame you are using, and if it goes back before 2014, then I'm afraid you'll have to provide the catcher data for each?

BTW, Santana did in fact catch one game for Masterson this season.
Yes.
And, yes, I missed that Santana caught one game of Masterson's this season.
Does Masterson look horrid?
3.71 ERA, 2.47 FIP, 3.61 kwERA .250/.333/.297 - 3.54 r/g against (that's his non-Santana numbers this season)

Compared to Lester:
2.17 ERA, 2.35 FIP, 2.75 kwERA .241/.268/.333 - 2.72 r/g against

I'll ask again, if you're trying to make the argument that Masterson doesn't compare to Santana please provide some actual data to support your position.

Because I don't see the huge difference that you are claiming exists.


Teams that get into the playoffs win more games than teams that don't - therefore even in the first round teams are better and playing for the goal they all have makes them tougher (WC games tend to have ace v ace). Getting into deeper rounds just increases the pressure and the quality of the teams being faced. Even a youngster of 13 could see the amount of pitching changes, best starting line-ups for almost every game, and such indicate an overall higher level of play.
Perhaps it would behoove you to quit thinking as a 13 year old does.
We aren't talking about 'an overall higher level of play'. You stated that it's more difficult to pitch. That's not the same thing.
Yes, better teams make it into the playoffs (hopefully, you don't think that this is some profound thought...)
However, better teams aren't necessarily better hitting teams.
Do you believe that the pressure that comes from getting deeper in the playoffs only affect the players that you are arguing for or does it affect their competition as well - perhaps canceling out?


I did everything I mentioned, except check the reliever vs starter stats on FG, but historically relievers have lower ERA's for obvious reasons (remember you have to observe the game, not just look up stats sometimes). Of course since we are talking I believe 4 appearances for an inning each, it's probably a minor difference if any, but, just to pay the stat troll, I thought it best to be complete.
Have you presented this data? Presenting the data you are discussing is a big part of being a 'stat troll'. You have a lot to learn.


BTW, by all means let's see everything non quantified Masterson has on his side?
I've made no such claim.
Only you have claimed that everything you cannot quantify favors Lester.

Station 13
05-04-2014, 10:50 AM
The way Lester is pitching, he'll finish top 5 in CY, maybe top 3. They really blew this entire thing by not going in at $100M to engage discussion. $70M offer? Quite a nice gesture, Lucky.

RedSoxtober
05-06-2014, 09:46 AM
According to ESPN.com, Jon Lester ranks 10th in baseball for having his pitches hit the softest. Yes, that’s measurable. Jose Fernandez of Miami rated first for generating the weakest contact, Sonny Gray of Oakland second.Boston Herald

bagwell368
05-06-2014, 08:36 PM
Well, 20.8% of the way through the season (7/34) Lester leads the AL in FIP (w/ a 166 ERA+) and IP, and has a monsterous 5.8/1 K/BB ratio.

Meanwhile Masterson continues to plod along with his 97 ERA+, a typical career 100 ERA+ #3 starter profile season... which is exactly what he is. Lester's career mark is a 119.

The only argument of Masterson being anything near Lester requires that Lesters worst season is included in the discussion. Career wise and right now Lester is whipping Masterson. That's a true 1A ace vs a #3 SP. Assuming no injuries the pay that they will earn will reflect the market/professional view.

filihok
05-07-2014, 11:25 PM
Well, 20.8% of the way through the season (7/34) Lester leads the AL in FIP and IP, and has a monsterous 5.8/1 K/BB ratio.

Meanwhile Masterson continues to plod along with his 97 ERA+, a typical career 100 ERA+ #3 starter profile season... which is exactly what he is. Lester's career mark is a 119.

The only argument of Masterson being anything near Lester requires that Lesters worst season is included in the discussion. Career wise and right now Lester is whipping Masterson. That's a true 1A ace vs a #3 SP. Assuming no injuries the pay that they will earn will reflect the market/professional view.
A pretty poor comparison, no?
You compare Lester's defense independent numbers to Masterson's ERA?
You also, again, neglect to remove Masterson's numbers with Santana.

Masterson has a 3.15 FIP with Gomes as his catcher. That's, roughly, an 84 FIP-
Lester's 2.15 FIP is a 55 FIP-

It'll be interesting to see if that gap is less than that by the end of the season.

RedSoxtober
05-12-2014, 02:08 PM
As we sit here, Jon Lester is one of the best pitchers in baseball.

According to Fangraphs, he has the best WAR (wins above replacement) of any hurler in the major leagues while totaling a 2.75 ERA, 1.08 WHIP (walks and hits per innings pitched) and 10.67 strikeouts per nine innings, second best in the American League.

And all seven of the teams Lester has gone up against this season reside in the upper half of the big leagues in OPS. There have been no layups. Then you have his history in the American League East and the postseason. It paints a pretty clear picture.

"I think I’ve seen every lefty in the game now, and for a while, and he’s climbing that ladder," said Red Sox outfielder Jonny Gomes. "I saw [Andy] Pettitte and Randy Johnson early on. He’s climbing the ladder to the top, not only in the league and in the game, but he’s getting up there for lefties who have played this game. He’s just now just starting to scratch the surface for his career. It’s not like he’s coming down. He’s just getting ready to take off."

Lester's value as a top-of-the-rotation pitcher is undeniable. The Red Sox know this better than anybody. But what the Sox also should understand is how long it took the lefty to get this level, and the difficulty that awaits when trying to find an heir apparent.More at Boston Herald (http://www.weei.com/sports/boston/baseball/red-sox/rob-bradford/2014/05/12/reminder-courtesy-jon-lester-it-might-take-so).

FWIW, Masterson's starts have come against OAK, MIN (2x), CHW (2x), TOR, KCR, and LAA. Their MLB ranks in OPS are: 7, 20, 5, 4, 24, and 2 respectively. He was responsible for 4 or more runs against MIN (6, 4), CHW (6), and LAA (6). Oddly in each of the 6 run games he gave up 7H, 6R, 5ER with walk (3BB, 5, 5) contributing to the trouble.

bagwell368
05-13-2014, 10:32 AM
More at Boston Herald (http://www.weei.com/sports/boston/baseball/red-sox/rob-bradford/2014/05/12/reminder-courtesy-jon-lester-it-might-take-so).

FWIW, Masterson's starts have come against OAK, MIN (2x), CHW (2x), TOR, KCR, and LAA. Their MLB ranks in OPS are: 7, 20, 5, 4, 24, and 2 respectively. He was responsible for 4 or more runs against MIN (6, 4), CHW (6), and LAA (6). Oddly in each of the 6 run games he gave up 7H, 6R, 5ER with walk (3BB, 5, 5) contributing to the trouble.

By 2017, Sox fans assume we'll have at least two young SP's that are top shelf #1 and #2 SP's, and a couple of decent 3/4/5's. Truth is we'd be doing well to have a #2 and two #4's and a #5 out of the farm. The rest expensive guys from FA.

If Lester ends up in cavern like LAD watch out...

His slash against is: .229/.274/.356 - his BB's down, his HBP's way down.

I've said before Lester's biggest issue was his frustration at ump calls affecting him too much.

Well, the umps aren't fussing with him as much and he's not reacting as much - and he seems angrier and more directed on the mound in general (pride? pique?) - perhaps the Sox FO did him a huge favor by kicking sand in his face. He's morphing from a Steib almost HOF'er profile to a definitive HOF SP (assuming his his health holds up at least average the next 6 years).

If he stayed he would have been the best Sox LHP in history except probably Grove, now he can take his show someplace else and win them a Championship or two, and waltz into the HOF first ballot in about 13-14 years. On behalf of Lester, we thank you Sox brass...

When/if we sign Masterson, BC and LL can chirp that Masterson will replace his value - shades of Jose Offerman being brought in to "replace" Vaughn... it is too laugh..

For a 2nd division club, better spending money on Masterson, but for a top 8 team that can win it looking for an ace? Masterson is about as useful as a fish with a bicycle - as an ace. Nice #3 in the NL West, might make a GM look like a genius.

RedSoxtober
05-13-2014, 10:51 AM
Not sure why you're resigned to Lester's departure. I'm not. The offer was insulting but Lester played it off well and continues to be the model citizen. I won't be surprised to see him in a Sox uniform for at least five more years at a reasonable market price (hint: it'll begin with a 2).

When I mentioned elsewhere that I'd include Buchholz in a deal for Stanton, this is one of the reasons. He's the only "expensive" pitcher the Sox have signed going forward. With as erratic as his performance has been I would put him in a deal and let someone else lust after the thought of harnessing his stuff into a consistent performance and give most of the savings to Lester.

bagwell368
05-13-2014, 12:16 PM
Not sure why you're resigned to Lester's departure. I'm not. The offer was insulting but Lester played it off well and continues to be the model citizen. I won't be surprised to see him in a Sox uniform for at least five more years at a reasonable market price (hint: it'll begin with a 2).

When I mentioned elsewhere that I'd include Buchholz in a deal for Stanton, this is one of the reasons. He's the only "expensive" pitcher the Sox have signed going forward. With as erratic as his performance has been I would put him in a deal and let someone else lust after the thought of harnessing his stuff into a consistent performance and give most of the savings to Lester.

Because LL/owners will look at it as: "we coulda had him for 5/110 extension.. now it'll cost something like 6/144..." That's too many years/money on a guy over 30, what if the innings he worked last year and this year kill his arm? Take the pick and let the farm fill in the hole, and get an impact hitter FA/trade to quell the masses - and actually Lester isn't that popular anyhow, so we'll be MORE beloved by our fans!!...".

I'm very good with Buchholz in a Stanton deal - in particular juicy for them if we cover most of the remaining money, and they can flip him for a nice return. Make them bite down on WMB, Nava, Brentz, and a couple of "name" spec P's and they might be able to pull it off... sooner the better where Buchholz is involved.

bagwell368
05-23-2014, 10:03 AM
Let's look at Lester v Masterson on a value basis:

Starting in 2008 thru 2014 inclusive, FG WAR$

---JL --- JM

$22.7M $02.5M
$27.2M $08.7M
$21.4M $08.3M
$15.7M $19.2M
$14.2M $08.6M
$21.4M $16.8M
$11.8M $03.2M

Masterson was in the pen a lot the first 3 years, so he gets a bye on those.

So it has been argued because Masterson's best year in the 3 year period (2011-2013) coincides with Lester's 2nd worst we are supposed to believe Masterson will be worth his contract (5/85) and a better deal than Lester at 5/115M)?

Now that this year is almost 30% done, I think we can include the numbers starting in 2011.

Lester $63.1M FG WAR$ > JM $47.8M - JM .75% of Lester.

If Masterson costs 5/$85M he's arguably a better deal than Lester at 6/144M. But if it's Masterson at 5/$85 and Lester at 5/$115M, I've got to go with the proven playoff ace. With Peavy gone, perhaps Buchholz too, and Lackey getting some sort of reasonable extension the sox could sign both.

I do believe Lester will be bid out of the park however.

homie564
05-23-2014, 03:54 PM
I'd take lest at 5/115.. no problem.. I'd even consider 5/120. I'd prefer 4/100 but I don't think that will happen

Wojo
05-23-2014, 05:57 PM
I'd take lest at 5/115.. no problem.. I'd even consider 5/120. I'd prefer 4/100 but I don't think that will happen
I could easily see the Yankees putting out a 6/150ish offer for Lester. Lefty, battle tested and proven, classy, plus being able to stick it to the Sox. Will be interesting if he takes a discount or not when $ start getting thrown around like that!

bagwell368
05-23-2014, 09:29 PM
I could easily see the Yankees putting out a 6/150ish offer for Lester. Lefty, battle tested and proven, classy, plus being able to stick it to the Sox. Will be interesting if he takes a discount or not when $ start getting thrown around like that!

Yeah, I expect that Yanks to be strong bidders, just not sure that he wants to go there. Several of the other high budget teams should jump into it as well.

RedSoxtober
05-28-2014, 02:25 PM
Keeping Lester has become a faction of this team’s newest cause.

“I hope that’s the sense,” Lester said. “You don’t want to be the guy everybody wants to get out of here, that’s for sure. It just means I’m doing something right. Obviously we’ve seen plenty of good players that nobody wants to be around, so I think that speaks volumes of how I treat my teammates and how I go about my work. So, yeah, that’s obviously something you want to here. That’s cool. It’s stuff that always gives you that little boost. It’s a cool thing to hear.

“If they’re going, ‘Hey, we’re going to need to do a little bit better than that to keep these guys around,’ then that means your process is sound and you’re not asking for the moon. That just says my guys have my back, they want me here to be part of this and they want those guys to try and get something done.”

...

But it’s the ability of Lester to separate the two, and keep offering stopper type of stuff, that most likely will surface the support when it really means the most.weei.com

bagwell368
05-28-2014, 05:37 PM
I remember back around '08 and in particular '10 when there was strong Lester vs Buchholz arguments.

Funny to think Lester might be gone, and we'll keep Buchholz until his deal is done (because we can't unload him).

Buchholz's stuff at best was better than Lester, but Lester had the make-up to be the guy... Buchholz has always looked like an undernourished feral animal. Now it turns out he can't run 96 feet w/o being exhausted.

In the immortal words of whomever came up with the line "million dollar arm and a ten cent head" I submit Buchholz as a card carrying member.

As for Lester the Sox will be lucky as hell if he settles for 5/$115.

RedSoxtober
05-29-2014, 09:46 AM
^^ If it's any consolation, Buchholz is only guaranteed through 2015 (with '16 and '17 as options)

RedSoxtober
05-30-2014, 03:07 PM
Negotiations with Jon Lester have stalled, but Red Sox president and CEO Larry Lucchino made it clear during an appearance on Thursday’s Dennis & Callahan show that the team still holds out hope of a deal with the pitcher before he hits free agency in the offseason. To hear the interview, go to the Dennis & Callahan audio on demand page.

While members of the front office previously expressed discouragement about the way the negotiations have gone, Lucchino acknowledged that the team anticipates renewing discussions with Lester’s representatives during the season.

“I certainly expect so,” Lucchino said.

The Red Sox were roundly criticized for their initial lowball offer, reported to be around $70 million for four years.

“I think it’s a mistake to discuss the status of ongoing negotiations as it is a mistake to get fixated on an opening offer,” Lucchino said.weei.com

RedSoxtober
06-11-2014, 11:51 AM
Cherington reported no change in the stalled contract talks with ace lefty Jon Lester and said the Red Sox haven’t considered trading him if they fall out of playoff contention.

“We hope to have a conversation again about his contract (before Lester reaches free agency at season’s end),” Cherington said. “We’d love to find a way to keep him here. But right now we’re just trying to win games and stay in this thing. I believe we will. When we do, we’re going to want Jon Lester pitching for us down the stretch.”Boston Herald

RedSoxtober
06-16-2014, 02:54 PM
“I think I could go kind of like the touristy side of it. Just the city, we just enjoy kind of the small, big-city feel that Boston has. But at the same time, this has been my home for the last eight-plus, 12 years; eight years in Boston and 12 years with the organization," he said. "It’s all I’ve really known. When I say that, it’s more so along the lines of the Red Sox side of it. This is where I want to be. You don’t see many guys that get drafted by a team and end up staying there their whole career. It’s just something I’ve always wanted to be a part of and wanted to do.

“Those are some of the reasons. Both of my kids were born here. We’ve got a lot of roots here that have kind of grown over the years. I’ve met a lot of great people up here. The list can go on and on, but those are just a few of the things.”

A few things are understood when talking to Lester about the subject: 1. Family matters weigh heavily in any decision; 2. He isn't a huge fan of change.Jon Lester on weei.com

bagwell368
06-16-2014, 08:57 PM
For anyone that still cares about Lester v Masterson

Name - IP - FIP - GS - 7+ IP WAR

JL - 92.0 - 2.88 - 14 - 10 -- 1.2

JM - 82.0 - 3.94 - 15 - 7 -- -0.3

bagwell368
06-29-2014, 06:05 AM
Well I assume the "Lester is not a true ace" gang ought to be a bit quieter after last night.

RaginRondo17
06-29-2014, 09:15 AM
This is a big month, negotiations really should pick up between the front office and Lester. If they can't come to a reasonable deal within a week of the deadline start shopping him around to teams. The way he is pitching he could bring back quite the haul and the more and more I think about it, I think the right trade with Lester is almost more beneficial then extending him (If we can sign a top of market SP to replace him).

BostonSports96
06-30-2014, 12:01 AM
http://espn.go.com/boston/mlb/story/_/id/11154406/boston-red-sox-move-resume-jon-lester-contract-talks

Apparently Lester's out-dueling of Tanaka got through to the Red Sox brass.....re-sign him already!!!!!

RedSoxtober
06-30-2014, 10:47 AM
Red Sox left-hander Jon Lester said that reports that contract talks between him and the team have resumed are off the mark. The 30-year-old, who will be eligible for free agency after the season, said that he is not talking with the team about contract terms, and further said that he does not plan to do so during the season.

...

Lester said that his preference to hold off on talks until after the season in no way should be interpreted as a diminished desire to remain with the Sox.

“No, absolutely not. And I’ve expressed that to the right people — they know that,” said Lester. “They see the risk involved, but I see the risk involved, too. Yeah, we could talk and get something done and I would be set, but at the same time, I don’t want that distraction. I don’t want guys to have to worry about stupid stuff like that, having to answer questions. Once again, we’re back in New York on sources and reports. Like I said, that’s the last thing that I want these guys to have to answer or me to have to answer or worry about.”weei.com

RedSoxtober
07-03-2014, 11:28 AM
“At some point recently, the Red Sox … have been trying to get this thing, at least to get to a point where they’€™re putting an offer on the table, but I think the horse is out the barn door,” €ťOlney said. “I think it’€™s all but over that Jon Lester is going into free agency and I think the only way that they circumvent that is if the Red Sox do what the Phillies did two years ago with Cole Hamels and say, ‘€˜OK, sorry about that. We’€™re totally wrong and we’€™re willing to give you a top-of-the-market deal for [$140 million-$150 million],’€™ and I think there’€™s no chance of that happening.

“€œI think that the Red Sox [have made an] effort in the last couple of weeks to put an offer in front of him. The bottom line is that the situation has changed. … If they had gone to him in spring training and said, ‘€˜Look, would you do something like five years and [$100 million-$110 million]?’€™ which, within the context of Clayton Kershaw getting $215 million, Felix Hernandez getting $175 million, that would have been a nice, fair, team-friendly, middle-of-the-road deal, but that’€™s not what they did.”

Olney continued: “€œThere is a level of frustration on Lester’€™s side, and I don’€™t know if it’s Jon himself or people around him, because I’€ve never been around a negotiation that’€™s gotten more tension attention* from other players on the team than this Lester talks. The frustration level of the other guys on this team on how this has played out is at a 9.5 out of 10, because they don’€™t get it.”weei.com

-Lavigne43-
07-03-2014, 01:01 PM
It's really simple. You offer him the deal you would offer in the fall after the season. If he says no you trade him. There's no excuse to keep him if you are unwilling to pay the price the market will give him. The cost will only go up in free agency where it only takes one desperate team willing to overpay. Not only would we only get a draft pick, but we would probably end up losing that draft pick signing someone else.

bagwell368
07-03-2014, 02:51 PM
LL - the self made aueteur... thanks for hastening the departure of the best Sox lefty pitcher since Lefty Grove.

RaginRondo17
07-03-2014, 03:35 PM
LL - the self made aueteur... thanks for hastening the departure of the best Sox lefty pitcher since Lefty Grove.

He really just makes me want to :puke: Hopefully we get something for him other then a draft pick.

Bo Sox Fan
07-03-2014, 09:27 PM
How in the **** does this organization hand Carl Crawford 7 years and $142 million without hesitation but have to really think hard in considering a Lester deal at what, 5 years and $115? After all he's done and is still well capable of doing?

If I was him I'd hit free agency and highly consider leaving Boston until management gets real.

BostonSports96
07-03-2014, 11:34 PM
How in the **** does this organization hand Carl Crawford 7 years and $142 million without hesitation but have to really think hard in considering a Lester deal at what, 5 years and $115? After all he's done and is still well capable of doing?

If I was him I'd hit free agency and highly consider leaving Boston until management gets real.

Henry's word (take with a mountain of salt) is that Theo pushed the Crawford signing when the rest of the Sox brass was against it.....but IDK.

bagwell368
07-04-2014, 05:27 AM
Henry's word (take with a mountain of salt) is that Theo pushed the Crawford signing when the rest of the Sox brass was against it.....but IDK.

I hear it was LL, and he used Bill James to help. I called that one as a festering piece of herring before, during, and after it happened. Thank god idiot LAD FO saved our bacon on that one.

Bo Sox Fan
07-04-2014, 06:32 PM
Lucchino would be the perfect replacement for Brian Cashman in New York as GM at some point. It doesn't take a brain scientist to hand over blank cheques.

grandsalami
07-04-2014, 11:19 PM
Lester talks back on

Nomar
07-04-2014, 11:46 PM
Pretty much it looks like he's getting extended or dealt by the deadline.

win red sox
07-05-2014, 12:40 AM
It would be disappointing if they don't extend him, it would be disgusting if they let him go for just a comp pick.

Bo Sox Fan
07-05-2014, 08:32 AM
There might actually be a God after all.

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2014/07/jon-lester-would-consider-mid-season-extension.html

bagwell368
07-05-2014, 10:24 PM
Inflation. LL probably could have had him for 5/105 or 5/110 in April, now it will take 5/120 (or more). Savvy business man...

ciaban
07-06-2014, 10:31 AM
It's really simple. You offer him the deal you would offer in the fall after the season. If he says no you trade him. There's no excuse to keep him if you are unwilling to pay the price the market will give him. The cost will only go up in free agency where it only takes one desperate team willing to overpay. Not only would we only get a draft pick, but we would probably end up losing that draft pick signing someone else.

Being traded doesn't preclude resigning him either, and there wouldn't be a pick to lose.


I hear it was LL, and he used Bill James to help. I called that one as a festering piece of herring before, during, and after it happened. Thank god idiot LAD FO saved our bacon on that one.
They certainly aren't complaining, they got what they wanted for basically cash, I mean really what did they give up that they didn't already have? Webster looks like a nice mid rotation prospect, but they have a bunch of those, and RDLR was just coming off TJ surjery and has never had good command.

RedSoxtober
07-06-2014, 04:20 PM
How in the **** does this organization hand Carl Crawford 7 years and $142 million without hesitation but have to really think hard in considering a Lester deal at what, 5 years and $115? After all he's done and is still well capable of doing?
Crawford is the reason why they're reluctant to make such deals. They obviously got burned on that deal, having departed from their convictions in order to create a more "marketable" team, and it handcuffed them from day one. They don't want to do it again.


Lucchino would be the perfect replacement for Brian Cashman in New York as GM at some point. It doesn't take a brain scientist to hand over blank cheques.
I'm actually hoping he gets in the running to replace Selig. It's clearly going to take someone with an insider's tie to the GM (check) along with a big enough ego to keep the owners together (check). Lucchino also has past connections to mid- and smaller-market teams so he might be able to connect with their concerns.


Being traded doesn't preclude resigning him either, and there wouldn't be a pick to lose.
No, it doesn't eliminate the possibility but it does indicate that it's extremely unlikely. Can you think of many examples of when it's actually happened? None comes to mind for me at the moment. Most often it seems that teams deal a current star when they've determined that they CANNOT meet his contract demands and that often becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.


They certainly aren't complaining, they got what they wanted for basically cash, I mean really what did they give up that they didn't already have? Webster looks like a nice mid rotation prospect, but they have a bunch of those, and RDLR was just coming off TJ surjery and has never had good command.
Cash. A LOT of cash.

Beckett: 7-13, 3.06ERA, 172K/55BB/185.0IP, (31GS)
Crawford: .279/.320/.405, 24SB, (626PA)
Gonzalez: .282/.335/.453 (119 OPS+)

So far roughly $125M got them a full time 1B (who is either declining or suffering from the big stadium), a part-time starter and a part time Crawford. Beckett has rebounded nicely this year but his surge unfortunately coincides with a massive drop from Gonzalez. And then there's the $20M/yr fourth OF. Perhaps no one is complaining but it was a financially insane move which, I suspect, is very close to bringing about the same handcuffs that it brought in BOS (at least when coupled with their FA moves).

bagwell368
07-06-2014, 06:40 PM
They certainly aren't complaining, they got what they wanted for basically cash, I mean really what did they give up that they didn't already have? Webster looks like a nice mid rotation prospect, but they have a bunch of those, and RDLR was just coming off TJ surjery and has never had good command.

Oh please.

Crawford has earned $17.3M in FG$ since the start of '13 - costing them: $32.4M to date. Bear in mind CC is very close to his 33rd birthday and has been in serious decline since 2010.

Beckett has pitched 185 IP since the deal - worth about $12M FG$ for LAD but it cost them ~$31.5M. That's not good.

They dealt Loney - who in 2013 earned $13.5M FG WAR$, about the same as Agon did, but for a much lower salary than Agon if he had stayed in LA.

Speaking of Agon, he's earned about 60% of his salary so far, but he sure doesn't look good to get better or even stay as good over the rest of his deal.

Of course LAD did pick up some $ to help defray those player costs, but not enough to pull this deal from being under water for LAD - not nearly enough.

Plus the two young arms..... now two of the top four arms in the Boston system.

It looked like a stupid deal at the time. It looks no better now, and probably worse.

Please to explain how LAD has nothing to complain about - you know - in the real world - with projected stats for the two long term boat anchors (CC, AG) figuring in vs. the two min price arms.

Whatever success LAD has had since the deal is largely attributable (closer to totally) to other players on the roster.

Sox won a WS last year using the money saved to get short term vets into positions of need.

I haven't seen or heard of any fans save LAD ones defend this deal for the longest time. Thanks for the refreshing humor (even if unintentional). Interesting - scratch deeply on a SABR first and always writer and find a staunch defender of the indefensible. AKA - homer.

ciaban
07-07-2014, 09:47 AM
Oh please.

Crawford has earned $17.3M in FG$ since the start of '13 - costing them: $32.4M to date. Bear in mind CC is very close to his 33rd birthday and has been in serious decline since 2010.

Beckett has pitched 185 IP since the deal - worth about $12M FG$ for LAD but it cost them ~$31.5M. That's not good.

They dealt Loney - who in 2013 earned $13.5M FG WAR$, about the same as Agon did, but for a much lower salary than Agon if he had stayed in LA.

Speaking of Agon, he's earned about 60% of his salary so far, but he sure doesn't look good to get better or even stay as good over the rest of his deal.

Of course LAD did pick up some $ to help defray those player costs, but not enough to pull this deal from being under water for LAD - not nearly enough.

Plus the two young arms..... now two of the top four arms in the Boston system.

It looked like a stupid deal at the time. It looks no better now, and probably worse.

Please to explain how LAD has nothing to complain about - you know - in the real world - with projected stats for the two long term boat anchors (CC, AG) figuring in vs. the two min price arms.

Whatever success LAD has had since the deal is largely attributable (closer to totally) to other players on the roster.

Sox won a WS last year using the money saved to get short term vets into positions of need.

I haven't seen or heard of any fans save LAD ones defend this deal for the longest time. Thanks for the refreshing humor (even if unintentional). Interesting - scratch deeply on a SABR first and always writer and find a staunch defender of the indefensible. AKA - homer.

The dodgers acquired him hurt, they knew full well what they were talking on, it's not as though they expected an all-star, and had they not taken his contract on, they would have had to give up prospects they liked instead of RDLR who had just come back from tommy john. They had to chose between taking on more money or trading prospects and they picked right IMO.
Plus he was a life saver last year with how much time Kemp and Ethier missed. He played great in the playoffs that year too.

Adrian Gonzales k% and BB% are in line with his career averages, his ISO is actually up from where it was the last two seasons, it seems his shoulder is healthy for the first time in years. He talked about it in April. Recently he has been feeling the wrath of the 'shift' but he is a good hitter and he will make adjustments. I'm glad they got him. BTW this doesn't take into consideration his intangiables and the invaluable role he has played as mentor to Puig and Hanley, and how he has help their maturation.

Besides are we really going to blame the dodgers front office for not predicting that James Loney would go from a terrible hitter(70wRC+ in '12) to one that's just poor for his position(102wRC+ this year) they weren't going to resign him, lets be real, and they needed someone to play the position, it's not like anyone better was hitting free agency. Also, they didn't give up anything good for him, Webster looks like a mid rotation pitcher at best and the dodgers have pleanty of those, RDLR has looked good this year, in 30ip which is about as small of a sample size as you can get. He has been better though than this player that was as good as gone anyway. And how do we know that if he had stayed he would have been any good, maybe the rays hitting coach saw something fixable that the dodgers just didn't.

Nick Punto: 2 war last year from a bench player is pretty sweet.

Beckett, he pitched well for the team down the stretch in 2012, and was hurt last year.
This year after returning from a pretty scary injury he has been a borderline all-star and a god send considering how mediocre Haren has been recently. As it stands he will be part of the playoff rotation barring injury or a trade. Considering he was someone the redsox were blaming all of life problems on he has been pretty good. Besides he only had 2 years on his contract, I'm not sure the dodgers were expecting to get their money worth out of him anyway, his production has been a blessing.

First of all no duh much of the success is attributed to other players, it's a team sport. Mike Trout has the biggest impact in the angels success, but their offense would suck without everyone else on that team being well above average or more for their positions.
But considering Kemp and Ethier missed a combined 101 games last year, Ethier was out for most of September and the whole NLDS and Kemp was lost from about August 1st and on, Crawford became invaluable, once again he dropped the prospect cost as well, if the dodgers didn't take him they would be out Joc Pederson and Corey Seager as well.. Adrian was the most consistent hitter on the team all though last year. Once again you have to consider their options at the time, and he was the best among them.


Most dodger fans don't defend this trade because it doesn't get brought up at all. But I'm in the dodgers forum and have never seen any dodgers fan complain about it either. And since they aren't complaining about it MUST MEAN THEY HATE IT, RIGHT?right...?
I'm not a homer, and you will have plenty of trouble finding any evidence of it, feel free to ask the mods of the giants forum if I'm a homer, they are SFRUSH90 and SFGIANTS1214 and Leandres SF. GO for it, I post in the giants forum all the time, and I don't act like a homer there or anywhere else.
I just don't think this was a bad trade for the dodges, they spent money which they have lots of, and traded a pitcher who had just come back from TJ and another who came from a surplus of mediocre pitchers who walk to many and have okay stuff.


BTW your right this trade did free up a lot of money that allowed the RSOX to sign key vets for the 2013 championship. However, this is virtually the same team, and they are 10 games under .500, plus people are discussing the redsox trading this team's best LHP since Lefty Grove. So maybe it had less to do with the dodgers being dumb and more to do with the stars aligning and the redsox getting lucky. It's almost like the RedSox were terrible in 2012, everything came together in 2013 and now they are back to being terrible in 2014.

ciaban
07-07-2014, 09:56 AM
As far as the money they spent goes, it clearly didn't matter to the dodgers. Besides, it's not as though that trade prevented them from getting someone they wanted, there still hasn't been a great free agent 1st basemen ti hit the market and there isn't one in sight. They weren't prevented from extending kershaw or spending 60 million on ryu, or guaranteeing Greinke 150 million. All it did was improve the team.

RedSoxtober
07-24-2014, 10:06 AM
In an e-mail to the Herald last night, Red Sox principal owner John Henry said the team has agreed not to resume contract talks with its ace left-hander until the season is done. In late June, Lester said he didn’t want to be bothered during the season with negotiations and risk becoming a distraction for the team.

“I’m not going to discuss Jon’s situation out of respect for both Jon and (general manager) Ben (Cherington) other than to say that both sides have put further discussion off until after the season,” Henry wrote. “It’s clear that both Jon and our organization would like to see Jon back next year if possible.”Boston Herald

goshhhjosh
07-24-2014, 10:16 AM
Boston Herald

Eh hopefully Lester is speaking the truth and really wants to come back. I would hate to see him as a New York Yankee and expect the Yankees to throw a boat load of cash his way.

Although it would be expensive, the Yankees would love nothing less than to weaken a division rival.

-Lavigne43-
07-24-2014, 10:47 AM
@alexspeier 16m
Source tells @bradfo Jon Lester still would be open to efficient in-season negotiations http://fullcount.weei.com/sports/boston/baseball/red-sox/2014/07/24/source-jon-lester-would-be-open-to-efficient-in-season-negotiations/ … via @WEEI

So they are still very far away from what Lester wants. Either they still low balled him, or Lester wants a ton of money. Trade him. Unfortunately I don't think they will, and he probably ends up signing with another team. If they are still so far away now, how can they expect to sign him in free agency with other teams driving the price up, and one desperate team offering an arm and a leg?

Station 13
07-24-2014, 11:14 AM
If Lester is playing elsewhere in 2015, write the season off. The rotation right now has 2.5 reliable starters. The rest are trash.

RedSoxtober
07-24-2014, 11:43 AM
@alexspeier 16m
Source tells @bradfo Jon Lester still would be open to efficient in-season negotiations http://fullcount.weei.com/sports/boston/baseball/red-sox/2014/07/24/source-jon-lester-would-be-open-to-efficient-in-season-negotiations/ … via @WEEI

So they are still very far away from what Lester wants. Either they still low balled him, or Lester wants a ton of money. Trade him. Unfortunately I don't think they will, and he probably ends up signing with another team. If they are still so far away now, how can they expect to sign him in free agency with other teams driving the price up, and one desperate team offering an arm and a leg?

I don't think this has anything to do with how close or far apart they are from striking a deal. The impression that I've gotten is that Lester REALLY does not want his contract situation to be a distraction to the team (himself included). He and teammates are asked about it every time he starts and there have been some pieces written about how it bothers Lester. The JH comment was, I think, intended to get the reporters to back off from asking about it every time he starts. I don't doubt that they may still talk behind the curtain.

Lester has done little but show how much the Sox need him next year. It's underscored every time... Buchholz takes the mound. :sigh:

Haystack
07-24-2014, 02:39 PM
If Lester is playing elsewhere in 2015, write the season off. The rotation right now has 2.5 reliable starters. The rest are trash.

So, you're telling me that on paper we'd be better off than we were heading in to 2013?

Station 13
07-24-2014, 02:45 PM
So, you're telling me that on paper we'd be better off than we were heading in to 2013?

You misread it.

Station 13
07-24-2014, 02:54 PM
Lester should tell Lucchino enough, let him focus on the season. This has drawn out since February.

Soxfan85
07-24-2014, 03:03 PM
TORONTO — As the Red Sox wrestle with the question of what — or whether — to pay Jon Lester, Dustin Pedroia represents a reason to be cautious with handing out another long-term contract.

It was a year ago Thursday that the Red Sox held a press conference on the field at Fenway Park to announce that Pedroia had agreed to an eight-year, $110 million extension.

It was hailed as a brilliant move by the Red Sox because it locked Pedroia up at an average annual value of only $13.75 million. Pedroia embraced the idea of long-term security for his family and the idea of playing out his career with the Red Sox. It was a win for all concerned.

The deal looked even better in December when the Seattle Mariners signed Robinson Cano to a 10-year, $240 million deal. Cano was statistically a better offensive player than Pedroia but they were comparable in many ways and Pedroia is a year younger.

That Cano received $10.25 million more per year made the Red Sox look prescient for locking up Pedroia when they did. Cano was better but he certainly wasn’t that much better.


Now, a year later, Pedroia’s deal isn’t quite so shiny.

Through Tuesday, Pedroia had hit .278 with a .723 OPS over 157 games since the day he signed his contract. In the 957 games he played previously, Pedroia hit .303 with an .828 OPS.

Pedroia once averaged a home run every 39.4 at-bats. He has seven in his last 644 at-bats.

Pedroia’s slugging percentage in 2010 was .493. It has dropped each year since, to .474, .449, .415, and now to .364. That’s a 25 percent decrease in less than four seasons.

Pedroia is hitting .269 this year with a .700 OPS. Based on an OPS+ of 96, he is a slightly below average offensive player.

Even Fenway Park, long suited for Pedroia’s swing, isn’t a safe haven anymore. He has hit worse at home (.256/.317/.351) than on the road (.283/.359/.380) this season.

Pedroia is 12th among major league second basemen in OPS this season and 10th in on-base percentage. His slugging percentage ranks 16th and he is tied for eighth in runs.

A player who stole 112 bases in 141 attempts from 2008-13 has two steals in eight attempts this season.

“I think in some cases I’m trying to do too much,” Pedroia said Wednesday before the Red Sox played the Blue Jays. “I know what it’s been and I know I’m going to be better. My numbers will get to where they’re supposed to be.”

Pedroia’s defense remains outstanding. He is second in the majors among second basemen in runs saved and first in UZR. That props up his WAR and by that measure Pedroia ranks ninth at his position.

But Pedroia was once in the discussion with Cano for being the best at his position. Now, in the American League alone, you can argue that Cano, Ian Kinsler, and Jose Altuve are ahead of Pedroia.

There are valid reasons for this. Pedroia played all of last season with a torn ligament in his left thumb that hampered his swing and sapped his power. He had surgery once the season was over.

Pedroia injured his left wrist on April 4 this season during a play at second base and was out of the lineup for two games later that month after receiving an injection.

The guess here is that Pedroia has been playing without complaint with another injury that will require surgery after the season.

“My wrist is fine,” Pedroia said. But that’s what he said about his thumb last season.

Pedroia turns 31 next month and it’s reasonable to believe he can be an offensive force again, particularly if he can stay healthy.

While you can’t measure a player’s will, Pedroia’s personality suggests he will do all he can to regain his form and probably will.

Plenty of Hall of Fame-level players had statistical dips in their careers and that could be what the last calendar year represents for Pedroia. Last season, Pedroia was fourth among second basemen in OPS.

If Pedroia hits .280 with a .750 OPS by the end of the season, it would not be a surprise. He’s the kind of player who can extend a hot streak for weeks. Pedroia is still a very valuable player to the Sox in ways tangible and intangible.

But given his statistical trends and the sure decline caused by aging, how will Pedroia look in 2018 when the Red Sox pay him $16 million? Or $40 million for the three years after that?

It’s easy to criticize the Red Sox for not just paying Lester. But it’s reasonable to understand their caution, too.

Still, the Red Sox should move forcefully to keep Lester off the free agent market. The value of a front-line lefthanded starter who can handle a market such as Boston is far greater than that of most any second baseman.

Pitching is the engine that fuels championships and Lester is worth the investment. The Red Sox would be foolish to let Lester walk away to one of their rivals. If Pedroia was worth keeping, so is Lester.

But a year ago, there was not a peep of protest about Pedroia getting $110 million. It made complete sense and the Red Sox were hailed as visionaries.

Now the cracks are showing and it’s an illustration that there are risks in any deal, even for a player such as Pedroia.

I agree 100%

Haystack
07-24-2014, 03:05 PM
You misread it.

How, exactly? Going in to 2013 we had Dempster coming off a 3.38 ERA between the NL and the AL, Lester coming off a 4.82 ERA, Buchholz coming off a 4.56 ERA, Doubront coming off a 4.86 ERA, Lackey coming off a 6.41 ERA and surgery. If we have two reliable starters going in to next year we'll be in better shape.

Station 13
07-24-2014, 03:10 PM
How, exactly? Going in to 2013 we had Dempster coming off a 3.38 ERA between the NL and the AL, Lester coming off a 4.82 ERA, Buchholz coming off a 4.56 ERA, Doubront coming off a 4.86 ERA, Lackey coming off a 6.41 ERA and surgery. If we have two reliable starters going in to next year we'll be in better shape.

2013 had nothing to do with what's in-store for 2015. And we don't have 2 reliable starter going into next year, at present we have Lester and Lackey. We could lose Lester and that would be unfortunate.

Haystack
07-24-2014, 03:16 PM
2013 had nothing to do with what's in-store for 2015. And we don't have 2 reliable starter going into next year, at present we have Lester and Lackey. We could lose Lester and that would be unfortunate.

My bad, you said we'd have 1.5 reliable starters going in to next year if we didn't re-sign Lester. If 2013 taught us anything, I think it's that you don't need to have an ace and you don't need to overpay for the best free agents available in order to be a World Series caliber team. You just need a good all around team and pitchers that pitch well at the right time.

RedSoxtober
07-24-2014, 04:23 PM
Lester should tell Lucchino enough, let him focus on the season. This has drawn out since February.
You're half-right. Lester DID say that he'd had enough. However, the main people drawing this out are the media, not the player/team. JH (and now Lucchino) making the public statements has more to do with silencing the questions than any change in the negotiations.

Bo Sox Fan
07-24-2014, 08:04 PM
My bad, you said we'd have 1.5 reliable starters going in to next year if we didn't re-sign Lester. If 2013 taught us anything, I think it's that you don't need to have an ace and you don't need to overpay for the best free agents available in order to be a World Series caliber team. You just need a good all around team and pitchers that pitch well at the right time.

We might have zero, zilch, nada, none if/when Lester walks and Lackey decides to bring the attitute again like old times and start pouting because he's not getting paid correctly for his performance.

The rotation could actually be a disaster, but money talks if ownership is willing to pony up and they should with the talent of free agent pitching on the market this winter.

RedSoxtober
07-25-2014, 12:09 PM
Judging by the Red Sox' approach thus far, the narrative suggesting their reluctance to go to five years or beyond with the 30-year-old Lester hits at the heart of the matter. If there was that comfort level to offer such a commitment, these late July days would probably be filled with the dotting of 'i's and crossing of 't's (as was the case when Hamels was locked up by the Phillies with a six-year, $144 million deal in late July 2012), instead of ownership proclaiming we will have to wait until after the season for news.

Unless there is a dramatic change of course, this could very well be the last season (and perhaps week) you will see Jon Lester wearing a Red Sox uniform.weei.com

bagwell368
07-25-2014, 09:01 PM
My reading of Lester is that's he's a fairly simple guy, and he takes people at their word. He said something about a home town deal and the azz hats that run the Sox meant, he wanted to grab a jar a vaseline for them. That offer was so stupidly low, followed by no counter that Lester just said "F 'em". I'll go to my grave thinking they could have had him for 5/$115M no problem in March, now it'll end up being 6/$160M or something like that.

He's gone, and we'll end up spend more for a worse ace two years down the line due to a restive Sox Nation. Just when you think you have some smart guys running the show (LAD deal and FA moves last year) they toss that in the trash with something like this.

Most Sox fans don't realize that Lester would pass Tiant as the 4th best SP in Sox history since the live ball towards the middle/end of next year in rWAR in about the same amount of innings, trailing only Grove, Clemens, and Pedro. Tell me again he's not an ace...

Bo Sox Fan
07-25-2014, 09:48 PM
^^ The same clowns hired Bobby Valentine as manager, had everything go right a year later, then decided to sit on their hands last winter after all was well again.

Boy have they miscalculated 2 out of the last 3 seasons (I'm looking at you Ben) You would think we'd atleast be competitive but to field a last place ball club twice in 3 years?? This never happens. Pry Theo back (wishful thinking) like we did Farrel, atleast when we didn't win we were right in the thick of things till the bitter end every year rather than having these emotionless groups swan diving to the cellar of the division under Cherrington with a lack of talent and a top 5 payroll.

RedSoxtober
07-26-2014, 01:20 PM
^^ The same clowns hired Bobby Valentine as manager, had everything go right a year later, then decided to sit on their hands last winter after all was well again.

Boy have they miscalculated 2 out of the last 3 seasons (I'm looking at you Ben) You would think we'd atleast be competitive but to field a last place ball club twice in 3 years?? This never happens. Pry Theo back (wishful thinking) like we did Farrel, atleast when we didn't win we were right in the thick of things till the bitter end every year rather than having these emotionless groups swan diving to the cellar of the division under Cherrington with a lack of talent and a top 5 payroll.

Please explain what moves YOU would have made that would have improved the team. The FA market sucked last year at the spots where the Sox had their greatest need -- OF. There was no way they would -- nor any reason they should -- have commit to Ellsbury before he bolted for the land of dead Benjamins. Choo? Plenty of reason to think he was capable of the .243/.356/.369 he's putting up this year and the money that he got is CRAZY. Rajai Davis was a good alternative but HE CHOSE to sign with a team he thought had a better shot at the brass ring. Who after that??? Let's be honest: most people thought the Sox were going to be fine and I suspect that you were among them. It's only in hindsight, with a bunch of guys having career-worst seasons, that standing relatively pat (in light of an empty FA market) looks like a bad decision. Oh, yeah, Sizemore was probably a poor decision but it was cheap and had no impact.

Sorry, but it drives me nuts when people criticize stuff in hindsight like this with no real alternatives on the table, only carping about things that didn't work.

bagwell368
12-31-2014, 08:01 AM
Well, 20.8% of the way through the season (7/34) Lester leads the AL in FIP (w/ a 166 ERA+) and IP, and has a monsterous 5.8/1 K/BB ratio.

Meanwhile Masterson continues to plod along with his 97 ERA+, a typical career 100 ERA+ #3 starter profile season... which is exactly what he is. Lester's career mark is a 119.

The only argument of Masterson being anything near Lester requires that Lesters worst season is included in the discussion. Career wise and right now Lester is whipping Masterson. That's a true 1A ace vs a #3 SP. Assuming no injuries the pay that they will earn will reflect the market/professional view.

Just wrapping up the Lester discussions by re-reading this classic thread. Three guys that insist that Masterson is actually a sound replacement for Lester. Several that insist that 5/$80 was a fair price for him.

Lester is (was) the 4th best SP for the Sox in the live ball era (since 1920) and Lester was in a tie with the 2nd best lefty in Sox history when he was dealt.

So we lived through the "closer by committee" and now we have to live with the "virtual ace by committee" - made up of career #4-#5's and a home grown player deep into his career with two brilliant stretches, and a bunch of DL stints and garbage to show. Like 11-7 games? Good, we've got a bunch on tap this season.

ruckus16969
12-31-2014, 10:36 PM
Please explain what moves YOU would have made that would have improved the team. The FA market sucked last year at the spots where the Sox had their greatest need -- OF. There was no way they would -- nor any reason they should -- have commit to Ellsbury before he bolted for the land of dead Benjamins. Choo? Plenty of reason to think he was capable of the .243/.356/.369 he's putting up this year and the money that he got is CRAZY. Rajai Davis was a good alternative but HE CHOSE to sign with a team he thought had a better shot at the brass ring. Who after that??? Let's be honest: most people thought the Sox were going to be fine and I suspect that you were among them. It's only in hindsight, with a bunch of guys having career-worst seasons, that standing relatively pat (in light of an empty FA market) looks like a bad decision. Oh, yeah, Sizemore was probably a poor decision but it was cheap and had no impact.

Sorry, but it drives me nuts when people criticize stuff in hindsight like this with no real alternatives on the table, only carping about things that didn't work.

Could have made a trade :)

ruckus16969
12-31-2014, 10:45 PM
Just wrapping up the Lester discussions by re-reading this classic thread. Three guys that insist that Masterson is actually a sound replacement for Lester. Several that insist that 5/$80 was a fair price for him.

Lester is (was) the 4th best SP for the Sox in the live ball era (since 1920) and Lester was in a tie with the 2nd best lefty in Sox history when he was dealt.

So we lived through the "closer by committee" and now we have to live with the "virtual ace by committee" - made up of career #4-#5's and a home grown player deep into his career with two brilliant stretches, and a bunch of DL stints and garbage to show. Like 11-7 games? Good, we've got a bunch on tap this season.

I honestly wouldn't mind if we gave Scherzer a huge deal.

He might even become my 2nd favorite player on this team

ruckus16969
12-31-2014, 10:46 PM
We honestly should have traded JBJ in "hindsight"

ruckus16969
12-31-2014, 10:47 PM
Might have got Stanton in a package surrounded around JBJ and WMB

corky831
01-01-2015, 05:05 PM
Clearly the Marlins were not interested in trading Stanton after giving him that mega contract

ruckus16969
01-01-2015, 11:07 PM
Clearly the Marlins were not interested in trading Stanton after giving him that mega contract

Probably not but if they got offered what they thought was going to fill several needs like lead off speedster to play center field and a power hitting 3B for 4 years plus probably some good SP prospects and other parts. They may have jumped

ruckus16969
01-01-2015, 11:08 PM
And maybe not Stanton but could have been another impact player I was just saying

GrkGawdofWalkz
01-02-2015, 12:00 PM
/ Close thread. Really, all the best to Jon Lester and his family. His time in Boston came to an end. Enjoy Wrigley.

RedSoxtober
01-02-2015, 12:45 PM
^^ Agreed. This is becoming sidetracked with tertiary arguments (what does Stanton have to do with Lester??).