Possible option to trade Lackey?

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

    Re: Three possible options to trade Lackey?

    Any bad contracts on the Angels?  He seemed to thrive there.  Maybe they can get the best out of him again. 
     
  2. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Three possible options to trade Crawford, Lackey

    Trade the two bad contracts, Werth who responds better to Big Market and Crawford who has responded to smaller market.  Sox need a right fielder now,
    Crawford never has mastered LF in Fenway.  Both do not seem to have adjusted to their new settings.  Would rather overpay for a RF----haven't we for the last five years.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from ADG. Show ADG's posts

    Re: Three possible options to trade Lackey?

    In Response to Re: Three possible options to trade Lackey?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Three possible options to trade Lackey? : Lackey had a decent "not great" year in 2010, enough anyway to call him a good #5 where I personally think he belongs because of all the run support he needs.  This seasons performance would have landed John out of the rotation on most tems if he wasn't making so much money.  Whether we keep John, or work out a deal in hopes he improves we still need a strong #4. I think John could have arm issues that we don't know about and could eventually end up like Dice K.
    Posted by craze4sox[/QUOTE]

    Not only would it have landed him out of the rotations of all teams, but he would have either been released or demoted. His salary is an albatross.

    Can a team really keep a player when, as he takes the mound for the first time in 2012, he will get booed by every one of the 38,000 people in the stands? Who in their right mind would cheer for that tool?
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from user_3992292. Show user_3992292's posts

    Re: Three possible options to trade Lackey?

    Heck no way that Lowrie could play RF.  He does not have a speed or arm to play RF.  If Soriano do come to Boston, who play RF, Crawford or Soriano?  Both have no arm either.  I know maybe you would say Crawford cant play Lf, but he cant play RF too.  

    Forget that trade for Soriano unless Crawford for Soriano!!

    Like someone said, need to find a decent RF who have arm and can hit too. Here are my ideal guys to sign him via free agent:
    David DeJesus 
    Brad Hawpe 
    Jason Kubel 
    Ryan Ludwick 
    Josh Willingham 

    Just trade Lackey for Zambaro.  That is the only trade that Boston can make cuz if no one want Zambaro, then who want Lackey.  
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Three possible options to trade Lackey?

    In Response to Re: Three possible options to trade Lackey?:
    [QUOTE]Lespaul says that Theo should be fired for signing Crawford but they should keep Lackey. Look, you dimwit. I said not offer Lackey more than three years and 30M which meant I didn't want the prima donna. 
    Posted by 1958lesspaul[/QUOTE]

    What a liar!

    You said you liked the deal, but it was a "year too long". You later retracted that part of your objection when you found out the last year had an out clause based on his elbow health. You said the signing was a "necessity".

    You never mentioned "$30M/3".
     
  7. This post has been removed.

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from beavis. Show beavis's posts

    Re: Three possible options to trade Lackey?

    I want to know what Sox get for Theo if his skates out of town...
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from notin. Show notin's posts

    Re: Three possible options to trade Lackey?

    In Response to Re: Three possible options to trade Lackey?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Three possible options to trade Lackey? : This is comical. The Angels wanted nothing to do with Lackey two years ago. Matsuzaka won't pitch until June at best, and Jenks? Wells at least fits into their outfield flanked by Trout and Boujos.
    Posted by ADG[/QUOTE]

    Too bad they also have Torii Hunter, Bobby Abreu, Mark Trumbo, and Kendry Morales besides the 3 you named.  And only 5 posititions to play them.

    Wells makes $63mill over the next 3 years and is blocking one of the best prospects in baseball.  The Angels would move him for Lackey in a second, and Matsuzaka and Jenks are more about evening outthe payroll than getting actual playing time from them.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from notin. Show notin's posts

    Re: Three possible options to trade Lackey?

    All this "cancer" talk has been debunkd by Francona himself, whose word I value over any of yours.

    I decided I do like Lackey. 

    He should never be traded for Wells.  I liked the idea when I thought Wells had 2 years left, but three? No way.

    Zito hasa full NTC and wants the West Coast.  Besides, all he would do is inspire 2000 "Trade Zito" threads.

    I liked Zambrano/Lackey, but I checked fangraphs and they indicate Zambrano's losing velocity, whereas Lackey is not.  (He's just losing location.)

    There is a better chance Lackey performs in 2012 than Zito or Zambrano.

    The ultimate longshot is Johan Santana.  He is owed $55mill over two years (with an option for a third).  Lackey is owed $45.75 over 3.  Santana is clearly the better pitcher, but is more expensive and a significant health risk, having missed all of 2011.  However, if he comes back, he is still only 33 years old.  He won't be the MVP candidate he once was, but might still be an above average pitcher.

    Still, that is an expensive gamble on health...
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from Teakus. Show Teakus's posts

    Re: Three possible options to trade Lackey?

    The bottom line is as much as I wanted to throttle Lackey this season, he's EXACTLY what we need for next season. He's a solid number 4 pitcher who can get us 12-15 wins and eat up some innings. He should never have been given a number 1's money, but what's done is done. We need to concentrate on other issues right now, such as bringing in pieces which will help to improve the flawed culture of this club, as well as improve the talent level. We need a manager willing and able to lead, not some kid interim guy that Theo "feels comfortable" with. We need a renewed emphasis on strength and conditioning, and anyone unwilling to get on board with that needs to be sent packing. We should resign Ortiz IMMEDIATELY, ( as in this week),to a 2 yr deal. Youk needs to have his "sports hernia" surgery NOW if he's going to...rather than waiting until February like he'll probably want to. We need a power hitting right fielder and at least 2 new bullpen arms, one a lefty specialist. Wake needs to go, (can have Lackey OR Wake-but not both). I'd offer Pap a decent contract, but it probably won't be what he's looking for and he's likely to walk. C'est la vie. Lowrie looks like a bust, though I still stick to my beaten down view that there could be Craig Biggio (light) greatness there under all of that sissy softness. I'd give him one more year to become a man, or finally ride off into the sunset wearing a frilly pink dress. Look, we are a solid team in need of a few critical pieces. We surely don't need to rebuild the whole team, as long as the transitions are handled smoothly. Bring in a chump and this fragile team could implode. They need to wrap up Larussa soon if he's coming, so he can hit the ground running. He's a choice with other possible benefits to our team down the road as well, and you who are aware know exactly what I mean. Finally, I will leave you with this thought. We learn faaaaar more from our failures in life than we ever do from our successes. As long as negativity isn't allowed to fester, this team will compete next year. The Nation waits and watches with baited breath...
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from craze4sox. Show craze4sox's posts

    Re: Three possible options to trade Lackey?

    In Response to Re: Three possible options to trade Lackey?:
    [QUOTE]The bottom line is as much as I wanted to throttle Lackey this season, he's EXACTLY what we need for next season. He's a solid number 4 pitcher who can get us 12-15 wins and eat up some innings. He should never have been given a number 1's money, but what's done is done. We need to concentrate on other issues right now, such as bringing in pieces which will help to improve the flawed culture of this club, as well as improve the talent level. We need a manager willing and able to lead, not some kid interim guy that Theo "feels comfortable" with. We need a renewed emphasis on strength and conditioning, and anyone unwilling to get on board with that needs to be sent packing. We should resign Ortiz IMMEDIATELY, ( as in this week),to a 2 yr deal. Youk needs to have his "sports hernia" surgery NOW if he's going to...rather than waiting until February like he'll probably want to. We need a power hitting right fielder and at least 2 new bullpen arms, one a lefty specialist. Wake needs to go, (can have Lackey OR Wake-but not both). I'd offer Pap a decent contract, but it probably won't be what he's looking for and he's likely to walk. C'est la vie. Lowrie looks like a bust, though I still stick to my beaten down view that there could be Craig Biggio (light) greatness there under all of that sissy softness. I'd give him one more year to become a man, or finally ride off into the sunset wearing a frilly pink dress. Look, we are a solid team in need of a few critical pieces. We surely don't need to rebuild the whole team, as long as the transitions are handled smoothly. Bring in a chump and this fragile team could implode. They need to wrap up Larussa soon if he's coming, so he can hit the ground running. He's a choice with other possible benefits to our team down the road as well, and you who are aware know exactly what I mean. Finally, I will leave you with this thought. We learn faaaaar more from our failures in life than we ever do from our successes. As long as negativity isn't allowed to fester, this team will compete next year. The Nation waits and watches with baited breath...
    Posted by Teakus[/QUOTE]

    I wouldn't consider a 6/7 ERA a solid anything for a starting rotation.
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from ADG. Show ADG's posts

    Re: Three possible options to trade Lackey?

    In Response to Re: Three possible options to trade Lackey?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Three possible options to trade Lackey? : Too bad they also have Torii Hunter, Bobby Abreu, Mark Trumbo, and Kendry Morales besides the 3 you named.  And only 5 posititions to play them. Wells makes $63mill over the next 3 years and is blocking one of the best prospects in baseball.  The Angels would move him for Lackey in a second, and Matsuzaka and Jenks are more about evening outthe payroll than getting actual playing time from them.
    Posted by notin[/QUOTE]

    Wells isn't blocking Trout. The GM was. Abreu is the DH, Trumbo is the 1B, and Morales gets hurt every year so it comes down to Hunter and Wells. Sure they'd like to move wells, but the Sox have no place for him. The only way the Angels take Lackey is if they also sent Ellsbury with.

    Could you imagine an outfield of Ellsbury, Trout and Bourjos. Ouch.
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from ADG. Show ADG's posts

    Re: Three possible options to trade Lackey?

    In Response to Re: Three possible options to trade Lackey?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Three possible options to trade Lackey? : I wouldn't consider a 6/7 ERA a solid anything for a starting rotation.
    Posted by craze4sox[/QUOTE]

    Lackey's ERA is one of the worst in the past decade. He's lumped with the following pitchers:

    Hochever (Rookie year)  6.55
    Garrett Olson               6.65
    B. Moehler                   6.57
    Lima                           6.99
    Fossum                       6.65
    C. Lewis (6 years ago)   7.30
    Drese                         6.55
    Elarton                        7.06
    Rupe                           6.59

    The one difference is that none of these guys probably made anywhere close to $2M a year, let alone $16M. That is stolen money.
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from DirtyWaterLover. Show DirtyWaterLover's posts

    Re: Three possible options to trade Lackey?

    But he's had such a positve impact on the clubhouse.

    Lackey kind of reminds me of my brother in law if my brother in law had money and didn't live in a trailer.  Although Lackey could very well own a trailer, most likely a triple-wide.  Those people don't live in trailers because they have to.  They do it because they want to.

    That's it - Lackey reminds me of trailer park trash, not that my brother in law actually has his trailer in a trailer park - he tends to develop issues with neighbors.
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Three possible options to trade Lackey?

    The ultimate longshot is Johan Santana.  He is owed $55mill over two years (with an option for a third).  Lackey is owed $45.75 over 3.  Santana is clearly the better pitcher, but is more expensive and a significant health risk, having missed all of 2011.  However, if he comes back, he is still only 33 years old.  He won't be the MVP candidate he once was, but might still be an above average pitcher.

    Still, that is an expensive gamble on health...

    I agree, but what's the odds lackey does well the next 3 years?
    I'll gamble on Johan's health over Lackey's chance of regaining his skills.
    I'd throw in a prospect or two as well. Maybe they'd want Lowrie or Salty.
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from emp9. Show emp9's posts

    Re: Three possible options to trade Lackey?

    In Response to Re: Three possible options to trade Lackey?:
    [QUOTE]All this "cancer" talk has been debunkd by Francona himself, whose word I value over any of yours. I decided I do like Lackey.  He should never be traded for Wells.  I liked the idea when I thought Wells had 2 years left, but three? No way. Zito hasa full NTC and wants the West Coast.  Besides, all he would do is inspire 2000 "Trade Zito" threads. I liked Zambrano/Lackey, but I checked fangraphs and they indicate Zambrano's losing velocity, whereas Lackey is not.  (He's just losing location.) There is a better chance Lackey performs in 2012 than Zito or Zambrano. The ultimate longshot is Johan Santana.  He is owed $55mill over two years (with an option for a third).  Lackey is owed $45.75 over 3.  Santana is clearly the better pitcher, but is more expensive and a significant health risk, having missed all of 2011.  However, if he comes back, he is still only 33 years old.  He won't be the MVP candidate he once was, but might still be an above average pitcher. Still, that is an expensive gamble on health...
    Posted by notin[/QUOTE]

    LOL!!! Laughing
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from craze4sox. Show craze4sox's posts

    Re: Three possible options to trade Lackey?

    In Response to Re: Three possible options to trade Lackey?:
    [QUOTE]The ultimate longshot is Johan Santana.  He is owed $55mill over two years (with an option for a third).  Lackey is owed $45.75 over 3.  Santana is clearly the better pitcher, but is more expensive and a significant health risk, having missed all of 2011.  However, if he comes back, he is still only 33 years old.  He won't be the MVP candidate he once was, but might still be an above average pitcher. Still, that is an expensive gamble on health... I agree, but what's the odds lackey does well the next 3 years? I'll gamble on Johan's health over Lackey's chance of regaining his skills. I'd throw in a prospect or two as well. Maybe they'd want Lowrie or Salty.
    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]

    Santana would be a long shot but something Theo would do so you never know.  I would trade Youk for Marcum and add Cuddyer to RF, then also do something with Lackey.

    The Brewers will need a 1B and might love to have Youk.
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from Teakus. Show Teakus's posts

    Re: Three possible options to trade Lackey?

    Nor would I, of course. My point is that while Lackey was toxic waste this season, he's usually just average. Theo apparently looked into his magic sabermetric crystal ball and saw a number one guy. Go figure. But he's NEVER been this bad before is all I'm saying, and we're stuck with him so we better all hope he bounces back next season. Trust me people: there will NOT be a trade made to dump Lackey. He's our problem to hopefully resolve. There are many other issues we need to address. We can't focus our energy on pipe dreams that will never materialize. Theo gave Lackey a $17 million per year deal. Who's gonna wanna take that off our hands? NOBODY. Accept it and move on with your lives. I've also gone on record naming Lackey next seasons come back player of the year. I like my chances...



    In Response to Re: Three possible options to trade Lackey?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Three possible options to trade Lackey? : I wouldn't consider a 6/7 ERA a solid anything for a starting rotation.
    Posted by craze4sox[/QUOTE]
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from traven. Show traven's posts

    Re: Three possible options to trade Lackey?

    I can't see the Sox being able to dump that contract via trade unless they are willing to eat a lot of it and Sox management is more intent on making money - not losing money.  Perhaps as the 5th starter - his high ERA but .500 winning percentage might be somewhat acceptable.  Very few teams expect much more out of a 5th starter.  At least he is durable - something the rest of the staff is not.
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from dannycater. Show dannycater's posts

    Re: Three possible options to trade Lackey?

    In Response to Re: Three possible options to trade Lackey?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Three possible options to trade Lackey? : I wouldn't consider a 6/7 ERA a solid anything for a starting rotation.
    Posted by craze4sox[/QUOTE]

    crazed....bingo
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: Three possible options to trade Lackey?

    In Response to Re: Three possible options to trade Lackey?:
    [QUOTE]I can't see the Sox being able to dump that contract via trade unless they are willing to eat a lot of it and Sox management is more intent on making money - not losing money.  Perhaps as the 5th starter - his high ERA but .500 winning percentage might be somewhat acceptable.  Very few teams expect much more out of a 5th starter.  At least he is durable - something the rest of the staff is not.
    Posted by traven[/QUOTE]

    That's the point people are completely missing. With all the trash talk, Lackey, since his signing, has more wins than Buch or Beckett.
    Ya can't win if ya don't pitch, and this is an issue going forward.

    So, his "replacement" better be able to do the same: Be 2nd on the staff in wins over two years, pitching in Fenway, in the toughest division on earth.

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from craze4sox. Show craze4sox's posts

    Re: Three possible options to trade Lackey?

    In Response to Re: Three possible options to trade Lackey?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Three possible options to trade Lackey? : That's the point people are completely missing. With all the trash talk, Lackey, since his signing, has more wins than Buch or Beckett. Ya can't win if ya don't pitch, and this is an issue going forward. So, his "replacement" better be able to do the same: Be 2nd on the staff in wins over two years, pitching in Fenway, in the toughest division on earth.
    Posted by harness[/QUOTE]

    harness, you do want our team to win right?  Sometimes I wonder when you back a guy like Lackey who Wake even out pitched.  We need to get rid of Lackey in my opinion and move on by finding a solid "middle of the rotation" addition to our staff.
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from 67redsox. Show 67redsox's posts

    Re: Three possible options to trade Lackey?

    EDT
     I can't see the Sox being able to dump that contract via trade unless they are willing to eat a lot of it and Sox management is more intent on making money - not losing money. 

    Traven,
    It was't that long ago that you could walk up to the ticket window day of and get great seats.

    There were a handful of people at Fenway for Ted Williams last game.

    If management doesn't turn this thing around there will be empty seats at Fenway. It may make more sense financially to eat part of Lacky's contract to put a better team on the field.  A winning team means ticket and merchandise sales.
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: Three possible options to trade Lackey?

    In Response to Re: Three possible options to trade Lackey?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Three possible options to trade Lackey? : harness, you do want our team to win right?  Sometimes I wonder when you back a guy like Lackey who Wake even out pitched.  We need to get rid of Lackey in my opinion and move on by finding a solid "middle of the rotation" addition to our staff.
    Posted by craze4sox[/QUOTE]

    That's what my post indicates. Winning. That's the bottom line.
    Lackey is second to Lester in wins since his signing. If you want him gone, you must replace that.

    The team wins with Tek; .670 to .500 without him.
    If you want him gone, that must be replaced.
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share