Lester: club option or qualifying offer?

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from ctredsoxfanhugh. Show ctredsoxfanhugh's posts

    Re: Lester: club option or qualifying offer?

    Unless you do want him to walk....which is also irrational because the Red Sox would get more value from a trade than 1 draft pick.

     
  2. This post has been removed.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from ctredsoxfanhugh. Show ctredsoxfanhugh's posts

    Re: Lester: club option or qualifying offer?

    In response to torgorocks' comment:

     

    In response to ctredsoxfanhugh's comment:

     

     

     

    Unless you do want him to walk....which is also irrational because the Red Sox would get more value from a trade than 1 draft pick.

     

     



     I would just like to see him GONE next year. I think i made that clear. Obviously, trading him would  probably be more beneficial than a draft pick, however, i don't see the SOX getting a whole lot for him. 

     

     

     



    Just because you don't like him doesn't make him Less valuable.  Lester would net a draft pick this year and next.  He's still better than more than half the starting pitchers out there.  If a team traded for Lester they would have an upgrade at some slot in their rotation + a chance to renegotiate + the draft pick in 2015 > than just a draft pick.  So Lester nets you more value than a unprotected draft pick.  If you don't want him on the team then we should be talking about trading him.....which I'm actually open to.

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from notin. Show notin's posts

    Re: Lester: club option or qualifying offer?

    In response to pumpsie-green's comment:

    In response to notin's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to pumpsie-green's comment:

     

    In response to notin's comment:

     

     

    Lester should have his option exercised.  No brainer.

     

    If the Sox deal a SP, Lackey might have as much if not more appeal than Lester based on his performance this year and his remaining contract,  which is $15.75 mill over the next TWO years...

     

    Two years of Lackey for about $2mill more might be very tempting, and the Sox might be eise to sell high beforeLackey enters his age 35 season. ..

     

     

    “Listen to the mustn'ts, child. Listen to the don'ts. Listen to the shouldn'ts, the impossibles, the won'ts. Listen to the never haves, then listen close to me. Anything can happen, child. Anything can be.”

    -Shel Silverstein

     

     




    That would also be OK. Dempster would then be a SP who provides depth at #6 and we would have to get or promote another SP. The way things are RIGHT NOW we have five SP under contract and that makes Lester an expensive sixth SP. Getting rid of Dempster would be ideal IMO, but who is going to take on his bloated contract?

     

     



    Dempster has one year left.  His contract I'd not bloated.  Worse contracts gey moved EVERY YEAR.

     

     

    One of the worst contracts for a SP in MLB history was Mike Hampton, and his deal was traded TWICE.

     

    Dempster might not bring back that much, but hebis hardly immovable...

     



    Good luck trying to get rid of a one year contract for a 36 year old fading pitcher whose ERA is 4.67 and whose WHIP is 1.48 at $13M. We would get NOTHING for him at all; we might even be forced to eat some of his contract to rid ourselves of him. So we are STUCK with him, in all likelihood, next year. Sure there are worse contracts-much worse. That doesn't make this contract a good value.

     

    [/QUOTE]


     

    First of all, Dempster himself was traded as recently as last year for the #10 prospect in the Rangers' system (Christian Villanueva).

     

    Second, why do fans act like it is so shameful to pay salary when a player is traded?  Alot of trades involve money, and in this case, it is only a one year deal.  In fact, the axiom is, the more you pay, the better player you get in return.  So since the Sox are not overcommiting to free agents, I say pay the whole thing and get a better player back.   It's not like this contract is looking as ridiculously cumbersome as Ryan Braun's deal will and going to restrict the Sox moves well into the future...

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from Joebreidey. Show Joebreidey's posts

    Re: Lester: club option or qualifying offer?

    In response to pumpsie-green's comment:

    In response to ctredsoxfanhugh's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    No, no way.  In my opinion the return we would receive for trading him should be greater than 1 draft pick.  Sox are better off either exercising the option or trading him. 

     




    I could live with trading him too. I just don't want to pay our #5 SP (#6, really) $13M. I think thats what they will end up doing, but IMO its a mistake.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Didn't you just finish posting that Doubront is a #5/6?

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from Joebreidey. Show Joebreidey's posts

    Re: Lester: club option or qualifying offer?

    ERA+ is the single best measure of a pitcher's performance. 

    No, it is not.

     

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from slomag. Show slomag's posts

    Re: Lester: club option or qualifying offer?

    I think Lester's going to make this issue moot by looking like an ace the rest of the way anyway.  After the first inning of that KC game, he looked really, really good.  

     
  8. This post has been removed.

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from Beantowne. Show Beantowne's posts

    Re: Lester: club option or qualifying offer?

    In response to ctredsoxfanhugh's comment:

    In response to pumpsie-green's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to ctredsoxfanhugh's comment:

     

    [QUOTE]

     

     

    What is a true #1 or a true #2 or a #3 or  #4 $5 pitcher.

    Do you have specific number in my mind; stats that a guy must reach to be considered a certain slot of a pitcher.  You can make an argument that the top 30 pitchers are #1 and 31-60 are #2 etc etc etc. 

    In terms of ERA, IP, WHIP, K Lester ranks 70th 25th 68th 32th  now why those don't scream top of the rotation starter I think you can make an argument that Lester is a fringe #2 solid #3 starter.  

    A guy like Doubront ranks 47th 73 81 and 46th respectively on those stats.  Which would Make Doubront a fringe #2 or the best #3 in baseball.  

    Of course these numbers are subjective and there are other stats that can be thrown in there but I think it would make for good conversation.  Personally If I were to go more in depth I'd like to look at some stats that measure control (although whip does cover that a bit)  Also Doubront has been much better the second half of the season so far so I'd make a strong argument that he is at least one grade better than his numbers show (a solid #2).

    MY POINT IS!!!! most of us, and I'm sure I'm guilty of this at times as well, tend to vastly underrate and overrate pitchers on this team because of our own personal convictions.  Some people think Lester is a #5 that is absolultey absurd.  Others try to say that Doubront has pitched like a top of the rotation starter, which is also absurd.

     

     

     



    Whatever you assign Lester (I see him as a #4 SP, but he is, in fact, our sixth SP on the payroll next year) is subjective. Do you want him as our sixth SP on the payroll, assuming we cannot get rid of Dempster, at $13M? I don't.

     

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I would get rid of Dempster before Lester but the point I'm trying to make is that yes what you view a guy is subjective but there also has to be substance to it.  If a guy leads the league in ERA, K's and WHIP and IP then it would be by an overwhelming consensus that he is the #1 pitcher in the league.  So if a guy has numbers better than 32 or 33 guys in the league then I think you can make a strong argument that if that guy is the 33 best pitcher then he is a very strong #2 pitcher etc etc etc. 

     

    So if there are 30 teams in the league and all things considered each have 5 SP then there are 150 starters in the league, give or take.  So in my opinion there should be 30 #1's 30 #2's etc etc etc and so forth.  The numbers don't suggest that Jon Lester is a #5 or a #6.  They suggest he is a #2 or a #3.

    You can make the argument that he is a #4 or #5 on this team....BUT if his overall contract is substantially lower than what the market value is for a starting pitcher of his caliber then it makes ZERO sense to cut him lose, if anything he should be traded. 

    [/QUOTE]

    CT,

    Every team in the big leagues has five man rotation. The best of the bunch carries the designation of #1 and then based on ability and which arm they throw with the rest fall into the remaining 4 slots. During the grind of a 162 game schedule sometimes the guy that started the season in the #1 slot pitches himself out of that role. Or in the case of Buccholz injuries prevent him from seizing the role. Lester entered this season as our #1 and needs to finish the year strong to keep that designation. Based on ability and results over the coarse of the year I'd probably slot Lackey over Lester. If the playoffs started today I would give Lackey the ball in game one. With a month and a half to go Peavy and Doubront will also have a chance to show that they're capable of taking the other slots. IMHO Lester needs to finish strong as in circa 2010 Lester to give the Sox a shot at winning the division and matching up in a short series with the Verlanders of the world. 

    Therein lyes the rub. Come postseason the Sox current staff lacks a true top of the rotation guy that matches up against the best of the best. While I get that Lester is a work in progress and certainly worth the cost of picking up his option. The question that begs to be asked and answered is could those money's be better spent in acquiring a true top of the rotation starter. A role that was supposed to be Lester's but it's been two years and a lot of water under the bridge since he's pitched well enough to even have his name in that conversation. Add to that the unknown of Buccholz and his ability to stay healthy. Our rotation while it's not by any means horrid, it is not among the best and short of that it'll be hard to raise another banner. If indeed that is the goal. 

     

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from CubanPete. Show CubanPete's posts

    Re: Lester: club option or qualifying offer?

    In response to ctredsoxfanhugh's comment:

     

    No, no way.  In my opinion the return we would receive for trading him should be greater than 1 draft pick.  Sox are better off either exercising the option or trading him. 

     




    Or they can decline the option, offer him ARB, and lose him for a 1st round pick. The team already has a lefty in Dubront.

     

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from notin. Show notin's posts

    Re: Lester: club option or qualifying offer?

    In response to CubanPete's comment:

    In response to ctredsoxfanhugh's comment:

     

    No, no way.  In my opinion the return we would receive for trading him should be greater than 1 draft pick.  Sox are better off either exercising the option or trading him. 

     




    Or they can decline the option, offer him ARB, and lose him for a 1st round pick. The team already has a lefty in Dubront.

     



    That's not how it works anymore. ..

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from pumpsie-green. Show pumpsie-green's posts

    Re: Lester: club option or qualifying offer?

    In response to Joebreidey's comment:

    ERA+ is the single best measure of a pitcher's performance. 

    No, it is not.

     



    Yes, it is. If you disagree, prove that my opinion is not as valid as yours is. Thats the problem you have Breidey: arrogance. I told you this before, as have others.

     
  13. This post has been removed.

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Lester: club option or qualifying offer?

    In response to pumpsie-green's comment:

    In response to Joebreidey's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    ERA+ is the single best measure of a pitcher's performance. 

    No, it is not.

     

     



    Yes, it is. If you disagree, prove that my opinion is not as valid as yours is. Thats the problem you have Breidey: arrogance. I told you this before, as have others.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    First of all, and ERA stat, ERA, ERA+, or ERA- is not a good stat for measuring relief pitchers, who often come into a game with 1 or 2 outs already, so their runners are less likely to score. I like WHIP better for relief picthers. I also think WHIP is about equal to ERA- for starters.

    Second, I think ERA- is better than ERA+, because I believe it is adjusted for park factors while ERA+ is not.

    Third, measures like WAR take into account many stats as well as how much you play.

     

    If I had to chhose one measure, I'd probably choose WAR, followed by WHIP, and then maybe ERA-.

    If you had to pick a top ten list of the best starters in MLB since 2012, which list is closest to your list?

            A              B              C

    1) Felix       Harvey    Kershaw

    2) Verlnr     Kershw    Harvey

    3) Kersw     J Fernz    Jose Fern.

    4) Scherx    Weaver   C Sale

    5) Wainwt   Bumgnr   Kuroda

    6) C Sale    M Cain      Felix H

    7) Darvsh   Iwaku      D Price

    8) C Lee     D Price     Cuerto

    9) ASanc    C Lee       Weaver

    10) Kurod   C Sale      Verlander

     

    They all look pretty good to me.

    (A= WAR, B = WHIP, C = ERA-)

     

     

     

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Lester: club option or qualifying offer?

    Then, there's xFIP-

    1) Feliz  72

    2) Harvey 73

    3) C sale  76

    4) Scherzer 76

    5) Darvish 78

    6) Wainwright 78

    7) Strasburg  78

    8) D price 78

    9) C Lee  80

    10) Kershaw 81

    11) Lackey 81

     

    or just straight FIP-

    Harvey, Felix, Scherzer, Wain, Kershaw, Darvish, Sale, Jose Fern, Verln, A Sanchez

     

    or tERA

    1) Harvey  2.55

    2) Kershaw 2.90

    3) Felix Hern 3.13

    4) Strasburg  3.25

    5) H-J Ryu    3.27

    6) D Price  3.32

    7) Scherzer  3.32

    8) Bumgarner 3.33

    9) J Garcia     3.40

    10) C Lee       3.41

     

    Looks like a lot of measures look good. Hard to say which is "best".

     

    Sox4ever

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from southpaw777. Show southpaw777's posts

    Re: Lester: club option or qualifying offer?

    In response to Joebreidey's comment:

    ERA+ is the single best measure of a pitcher's performance. 

    No, it is not.

     




    You cant just use one stat and say its the single best measure. Actually, ERA- is better than ERA+, and even then there are many others that will give you a better all around measure of a pitchers performance. limiting yourself to 1 or 2 stats will NOT give you a full and clear picture no matter what pitcher your talking about.

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from ctredsoxfanhugh. Show ctredsoxfanhugh's posts

    Re: Lester: club option or qualifying offer?

    What if you could only use 3 stats to evaluate a pitcher...which 3 would you use?

    I'd pick IP ERA+ and WHIP

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from pumpsie-green. Show pumpsie-green's posts

    Re: Lester: club option or qualifying offer?

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

    Then, there's xFIP-

    1) Feliz  72

    2) Harvey 73

    3) C sale  76

    4) Scherzer 76

    5) Darvish 78

    6) Wainwright 78

    7) Strasburg  78

    8) D price 78

    9) C Lee  80

    10) Kershaw 81

    11) Lackey 81

     

    or just straight FIP-

    Harvey, Felix, Scherzer, Wain, Kershaw, Darvish, Sale, Jose Fern, Verln, A Sanchez

     

    or tERA

    1) Harvey  2.55

    2) Kershaw 2.90

    3) Felix Hern 3.13

    4) Strasburg  3.25

    5) H-J Ryu    3.27

    6) D Price  3.32

    7) Scherzer  3.32

    8) Bumgarner 3.33

    9) J Garcia     3.40

    10) C Lee       3.41

     

    Looks like a lot of measures look good. Hard to say which is "best".

     

    Sox4ever



    Well thats the point. My opinion is that its ERA+, which adjusts for the pitcher's park and league:
    (Adjusted ERA+, often simply abbreviated to ERA+ or ERA plus, is a pitching statistic in baseball. It adjusts a pitcher's earned run average (ERA) according to the pitcher's ballpark (in case the ballpark favors batters or pitchers) and the ERA of the pitcher's league. )

    You may have a different opinion. I think ERA+ is the single most important measure of performance because a pitcher is out there to prevent runs to the best of his ability. Some ballparks either aide or detract from those results, so that factor has to be considered. Therefore, ERA+, if you are going to use a single measure of performance, is better than WHIP or WAR IMO because WAR follows, in general, ERA+ and WHIP only measures how many guys reach base, not how many score runs (this is not to say that WHIP isn't important: it is). For example, in 2008 DiceK had an ERA+ of 160, an excellent number to own, but a very mediocre WHIP of 1.324. Was that a good year for him? I would say it was a great, if lucky somewhat, year. Its not WHIP that matters most, its how many runs you allow to score.

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from pumpsie-green. Show pumpsie-green's posts

    Re: Lester: club option or qualifying offer?

    In response to ctredsoxfanhugh's comment:

    What if you could only use 3 stats to evaluate a pitcher...which 3 would you use?

    I'd pick IP ERA+ and WHIP




    Good question. I would use ERA+, WHIP, and K/BB ratio. The reason I would not use IP is that you can have a guy like Dempster or Wakefield who eats up innings while other teams eat THEM up. As SP said, there is no single measure that accurately describes the performance of a pitcher. What I have been saying is that if you have to choose one, for me, its ERA+,

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from ctredsoxfanhugh. Show ctredsoxfanhugh's posts

    Re: Lester: club option or qualifying offer?

    In response to pumpsie-green's comment:

    In response to ctredsoxfanhugh's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    What if you could only use 3 stats to evaluate a pitcher...which 3 would you use?

    I'd pick IP ERA+ and WHIP

     




    Good question. I would use ERA+, WHIP, and K/BB ratio. The reason I would not use IP is that you can have a guy like Dempster or Wakefield who eats up innings while other teams eat THEM up. As SP said, there is no single measure that accurately describes the performance of a pitcher. What I have been saying is that if you have to choose one, for me, its ERA+,

     

    [/QUOTE]

    True.  I would use H/9 and BB/9 but figured I could clump those two in with WHIP.  The reason why I personally like IP is it is usually representing of other success.  If a guy is going deep into games he is generally pitching well and he's also resting the bullpen. A guy who goes 9 innings and gives up 4 runs might not have as great an ERA as someone who gives up 2 runs in 6 innings but at the end of the day you might have a better chance of winning with the guy who went 9 innings, and those benefits can spill over into the next day.  I understand it's subjective and I'm not saying there is really a right or wrong answer.  I just feel that most pitchers who go 200+ in a season are usually very good and very valuable.  Seriously how often does a guy pitch 220 innings in a season and stink???? Of course as I'm writing this I realize even using my own logic using IP to evaluate a pitcher probably holds much more weight for a starter than it does a reliever. 

    For relievers I think I'd use ER/inhereted runners, K/BB, & BA against. 

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from ADG. Show ADG's posts

    Re: Lester: club option or qualifying offer?

    In response to pumpsie-green's comment:

    In response to hill55's comment:

     

    Would the Red Sox be better off exercising the $13 million club option for 2014 or declining Jon Lester's option and instead making a qualifying offer of about $14 million to the lefthander?

    The first choice would guarantee that Lester remains under team control through 2014. The second choice costs the Red Sox an extra $1 million for the possibility of a compensatory draft pick should Lester decline the qualifying offer and sign elsewhere.

    The Sox could exercise the option and then made a qualifying offer following the 2014 season, but would assume the risk that Lester would not be worthy of a qualifying offer in a year.

    Thoughts?

     



    I would make him a qualifying offer of $14M and "risk" losing him next year. Our SP for next year are as follows (all under contract): Breakholz, Doubront, Peavy, Lackey, and Dempster. Why would we want a #5 SP at $13M for a year? Thats pretty expensive. Now I realize that what will most likely happen is that the Sox will pick up his option or try to negotiate a longer term deal with him, but based on his overall performance to this point this year and all of last year, secondarily, he is not someone I value more than a #4-5 SP, and he should be paid accordingly.

     



    Pumpsie - If they retain him, all starters but Doubront will make $13M+. If they don't, Doubront and one other starter makes less than $13M.

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from Beantowne. Show Beantowne's posts

    Re: Lester: club option or qualifying offer?

    In response to ctredsoxfanhugh's comment:

    What if you could only use 3 stats to evaluate a pitcher...which 3 would you use?

    I'd pick IP ERA+ and WHIP



    WHIP, Opponants BAA & Slg are the best indicators of a pitchers ability to limit base runners which lead to runs earned or unearned...

    ERA is flawed in that it weighs pitchers based on 9 innings...which is no longer relavent in the modern game, where a starter rarely pitches into the 7th. ERA minus and plus are equally flawed becasue they're also weighted based on 9 innings...

    I've always been a fan of runs allowed per innings pitched for relivers and runs allowed per Game for starters. It's a much better measure than ERA

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from ctredsoxfanhugh. Show ctredsoxfanhugh's posts

    Re: Lester: club option or qualifying offer?

    In response to Beantowne's comment:

    In response to ctredsoxfanhugh's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    What if you could only use 3 stats to evaluate a pitcher...which 3 would you use?

    I'd pick IP ERA+ and WHIP

     



    WHIP, Opponants BAA & Slg are the best indicators of a pitchers ability to limit base runners which lead to runs earned or unearned...

     

    ERA is flawed in that it weighs pitchers based on 9 innings...which is no longer relavent in the modern game, where a starter rarely pitches into the 7th. ERA minus and plus are equally flawed becasue they're also weighted based on 9 innings...

    I've always been a fan of runs allowed per innings pitched for relivers and runs allowed per Game for starters. It's a much better measure than ERA

    [/QUOTE]

    Era has its merits.  I admit it's flawed but every stat alone only tells the partial story.  I still feel that when augmented with other stats ERA is one of the better ones.

     
  24. This post has been removed.

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from Joebreidey. Show Joebreidey's posts

    Re: Lester: club option or qualifying offer?

    In response to ctredsoxfanhugh's comment:

    What if you could only use 3 stats to evaluate a pitcher...which 3 would you use?

    I'd pick IP ERA+ and WHIP



    xFIP and/or FIP using FG stats.

    OPSa, K/W, GB/FB using the usual BR stats.

    You don't usually see a ton of difference, but guys like Hellickson had an excellent ERA in 2011 and 2012, but didn't really pitch that well.  This year, his BABIP and LOB% normalized and his ERA is almost two runs higher.

    But my favorite all-time example is Zito.  He had an abysmal K/W in his last year with the As, but a very high strand rate.  He had a 3.83 ERA, but a 4.89 FIP and a 5.22 xFIP.  It wasn't at all unpredictable.

     

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share