Would you trade Lackey for younger prospects ?

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

    Re: Would you trade Lackey for younger prospects ?

    I would still probably trade a starter, but now that it looks like we will not be adding Hudson or Tanaka, its less certain. One problem with waiting until March is the salaries. Other then Doubront and maybe Lackey, it would be tough to trade our pitchers salary. Most teams don't go into spring training with a 13 million dollar slot to fit one of our pitchers into. We would likely have to eat a bunch of salary unless we trade Doubront.

    On trading Lackey, he was the 4th most important player on the playoff run, behind only Koji, Lester and Papi. Hard to trade that. Also Lackey is on a two year deal. If we deal him, we could be out 4 of our 6 starters by 2015. I would still trade him for the right deal, but it would have to be a awsome deal like the Shields and Dickey deals. Otherwise, I would lean towards trading Dempster or Peavy.....now.

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

    Re: Would you trade Lackey for younger prospects ?

    In response to Hfxsoxnut's comment:

    In response to southpaw777's comment:

    Ive also named a few names from Az and KC.

    My main point is hes worth the most in a trade between the over 30 group, and hes a perfect "sell high" candidate. To me, hes still about a 4ERA (3.52 this year) guy who pitched above his head this year.



    Lackey isn't really a 4 ERA guy and he didn't pitch over his head this year.  His last 5 seasons with the Angels, his highest ERA was 3.83.  His 2013 season was in line with those last 5 seasons with the Angels.  His terrible 2011 numbers were obviously a result of being injured.   

     




    at 35yo, I dont see him getting better is all.

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

    Re: Would you trade Lackey for younger prospects ?

    In response to southpaw777's comment:

    In response to Hfxsoxnut's comment:

    In response to southpaw777's comment:

    Ive also named a few names from Az and KC.

    My main point is hes worth the most in a trade between the over 30 group, and hes a perfect "sell high" candidate. To me, hes still about a 4ERA (3.52 this year) guy who pitched above his head this year.



    Lackey isn't really a 4 ERA guy and he didn't pitch over his head this year.  His last 5 seasons with the Angels, his highest ERA was 3.83.  His 2013 season was in line with those last 5 seasons with the Angels.  His terrible 2011 numbers were obviously a result of being injured.   

     




    at 35yo, I dont see him getting better is all.




    Agree. Even the Great ones cant.

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

    Re: Would you trade Lackey for younger prospects ?

    In response to Hetchinspete's comment:

    In response to southpaw777's comment:

    In response to jete02fan's comment:

    In response to southpaw777's comment:

    I ask this because the Dbacks really need, and are looking for a Pitcher like Lackey to solidify their rotation. At an average of 8.5M a year for 2 years, hes a great bargain. He would do well at Chase Field too.

    The Dbacks have loads of good young pitching, as well as position players, and are willing to deal some of their prospects for pitching. Im sure we could always add to the deal, but I think the Sox and Az match up good. Just a thought.

     

    are you talking position or pitching prospects??(or a combo) 

    I think there would be more pieces to tha trade than just lackey. Az has some nice pitchers and a 3b, Davidson, that could also be a very good fit for 1b.

    Im just throwing something out there and see what people think. Its worth the discussion IMO. Im not saying to trade everyone, Just bringing up a topic for discussion...

    Depending on the return, I dont think there will be a huge dropoff, if much at all, with lackey gone and go with Peavy and Dempster while adding a 1b for 6 years and maybe another young hurler. They have to kids who look to be solid closers too with Barrett and Stites.

    Lackey is still a 4ish ERA pitcher that I can see having a 14-11 record. Thats good, but hes not untradable. Especially if were talking about possibly improving 2 positions for 6 years. Im not expecting a repeat, although I expect they will always be competetive. If you get into the PO, anything can happen from there.



    South, 

    Dempster is at the end, not really reliable for much else than a 6th starter if needed to maybe a bench warmer. With Lackey another year removed from surgery I see another year like this one, low to mid-3.50 era, a solid reliable starter. Peavy a semi-reliable 5th man. I think you're underestimating Lackey. With what he showed us in the post season, World Series I think he has possibilities of 15-16 wins with some run support. His won-loss record in 2013 would have been more like 15-10 with some support this year. 

    Just my thoughts. Will be interesting to see who comes closer in prediction if one of us remembers. 

    Cheers, 

    Hetch




    As far as reliable, Dempster has been the most reliable out of the 3. 180+ IP and 30+ starts the last 7-8 years, while the other 2 have had injury issues. Performance is different. Demp is a perfect BOTR starter with a 4.5ERA and can eat some innings to save the pen.

    But I completely understand everyones reasoning for wanting to keep him. I certainly dont see a low 3 ERA. I would bet that its closer to 4 than 3, which I also have no issue with. We can all agree to disagree on that one. Im not dumping on Lackey because I think he would net the best return. My bottom line is the deal has to make sense for the Sox in 2014 and beyond..

    Do you think lackey will be a low/mid 3 ERA guy when hes 36-37yo?

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

    Re: Would you trade Lackey for younger prospects ?

    Nope.

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

    Re: Would you trade Lackey for younger prospects ?

    It's too bad Dempster didn't finish up a little stronger as he would have been the best trade chip. 

    We see every year that what appears to be too much starting pitching is never too much by the end. 

    I think you listen to offers on Lackey but probaby keep him

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from GoUconn13. Show GoUconn13's posts

    Re: Would you trade Lackey for younger prospects ?

    IF Boston going to trade LAckey at the same time who know that Bucholtz continues to have a health problem.  Then who know that these rookies cant pitch at the major league level which will force Ben C to find a pitcher or two to keep the Sox's season alive for next season.  Meaning Ben C will force himself to spend $$$ to find a couple pitchers to keep the rotation to stay strong at the same time to try to have another good season.

    That isnt going to work.  Keeping Lackey is a better solution as well he is only being paid 1 mm dollars for the  2015 season.  That is freaking cheap!!

    Trade Dempster first!!

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

    Re: Would you trade Lackey for younger prospects ?

    Absolutely ridiculous to consider trading Lackey after he finally shows what he can do!

    It was primarily our pitching that won us the WS, & now we want to trade it away???

    Real smart!  It sure wasn't our bats.. Sure!  We had a few more clutch big hits than the other guys, but it was our pitching that kept us in it.  Period!

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

    Re: Would you trade Lackey for younger prospects ?

    Think we've seen the best we're going to see from Lackey, he was motivated this season to prove some people wrong, maybe he had a little take-the-millions-and-give-nothing-back guilt spurring him too, and he does do well in big games, that is, rises to the occasion.  Were he 30 I'd keep him, but he's 35 and not expensive for two seasons and his stock is high from his prove-it-to-you season (even showed up in great shape).  If a solid offer came our way, be hard to refuse.

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

    Re: Would you trade Lackey for younger prospects ?

    In response to Hfxsoxnut's comment:

    In response to Joebreidey's comment:

    It is rather amazing that last year, many posters wanted Lackey dumped at all costs.  Now he is the no-trade list.



    True Joe, although there was no way of knowing how much he would benefit from the surgery.  I was certainly hopeful about it, but I'd say he went beyond my most optimistic projections.

    Recent history with pitchers after having TJ suggests that if the player dedicates themselves to the rehab, that they comeback stronger. Lackey as evidenced by his overall physical condition when he arrived at camp cleary did the work and the results of his efforts paid off. What we saw last year was the guy the Sox thought they'd signed, which was a top of the rotation pitcher with postseason moixy. A guy that wants the ball in big games. While I agree that he's never been what one would consider an ace. He has been a solid top of the rotation pitcher who when healthy, will take the ball every five days and compete. 

    So I ask why would we as defending Champions trade away arguably our second best starter who's under contract for the next two seasons at well below market value. One with Lackey's pedigree? The only answer that I can come up with is if we can acquire a young proven middle of the order bat. a player that is under contract for at least three years and fits the profile of a player a team can build a lineup around someone like "Joey Votto". Short of that it doesn't make a ton of sense to trade away 200 quality innings or 400 if you include both 2014 & 2015 which is Lackey's expected workload in the next two years. 

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

    Re: Would you trade Lackey for younger prospects ?

    In response to soxnewmex's comment:

    Think we've seen the best we're going to see from Lackey, he was motivated this season to prove some people wrong, maybe he had a little take-the-millions-and-give-nothing-back guilt spurring him too, and he does do well in big games, that is, rises to the occasion.  Were he 30 I'd keep him, but he's 35 and not expensive for two seasons and his stock is high from his prove-it-to-you season (even showed up in great shape).  If a solid offer came our way, be hard to refuse.



    I would say that his motivation was to prove to himself and the team, that once healthy was the player they thought they'd signed vs the one that tried in vain to pitch with diminished stuff for two years. Something that is often overlooked by many of his detractors in Red Sox nation...

     

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

    Re: Would you trade Lackey for younger prospects ?

    In response to Beantowne's comment:

    In response to Hfxsoxnut's comment:

    In response to Joebreidey's comment:

    It is rather amazing that last year, many posters wanted Lackey dumped at all costs.  Now he is the no-trade list.



    True Joe, although there was no way of knowing how much he would benefit from the surgery.  I was certainly hopeful about it, but I'd say he went beyond my most optimistic projections.

    Recent history with pitchers after having TJ suggests that if the player dedicates themselves to the rehab, that they comeback stronger. Lackey as evidenced by his overall physical condition when he arrived at camp cleary did the work and the results of his efforts paid off. What we saw last year was the guy the Sox thought they'd signed, which was a top of the rotation pitcher with postseason moixy. A guy that wants the ball in big games. While I agree that he's never been what one would consider an ace. He has been a solid top of the rotation pitcher who when healthy, will take the ball every five days and compete. 

    So I ask why would we as defending Champions trade away arguably our second best starter who's under contract for the next two seasons at well below market value. One with Lackey's pedigree? The only answer that I can come up with is if we can acquire a young proven middle of the order bat. a player that is under contract for at least three years and fits the profile of a player a team can build a lineup around someone like "Joey Votto". Short of that it doesn't make a ton of sense to trade away 200 quality innings or 400 if you include both 2014 & 2015 which is Lackey's expected workload in the next two years. 




    Like I said, Its got to make sense.

    I agree with everyones valid points here who are saying to not trade him.

    I also believe that if the return makes us a better overall team, looking at the big picture,  you do it.

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from levasseujj. Show levasseujj's posts

    Re: Would you trade Lackey for younger prospects ?


    Lackey is a gamer....he wants the ball in big games and has proven that he excels in those situations.  Bucholz has proven that he can't survive a full year and I have doubts that he is the type of gamer that Lackey is in big games, never shown much mental toughness as far as I can see.  Lackey is inexpensive, especially for a 2-3 guy and it would be hard to get equal or better short term value for him in a trade.  The sox have enough prospects....if they move Lackey it would have to be for a younger MLB ready player who fills a need or extends what Lackey provides past 2015.  If I were Ben I would shop Dempster/Peavy around at the winter meetings and fill other needs (catcher, BP depth).  I would also take advantage of the current high market for RH power and shop Brentz and WMB around to see if someone would offer a crazy to pass up deal.  Brentz' numbers look good but he has holes that will get exposed....he strikes out a lot, not sure he is going to be the sure-fire regular RF that he is talked up to be.  Taking advantage of the current need for RH power could provide a good return right now.  I would also tell Lavarnway to sell his catchers equipment and invest in a 1B mitt and a good OF glove because that is where his future is with the Sox organization.  Don't really care if his agent likes it or not.....that is where he would be playing come spring training.  I think the stress of trying to become a good defensive catcher is really slowing his progress as a hitter and removing that stress might just create another RH bat that can be used as trade bait or depth in the OF/1B mix.   

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

    Re: Would you trade Lackey for younger prospects ?

    In response to levasseujj's comment:


    Lackey is a gamer....he wants the ball in big games and has proven that he excels in those situations.  Bucholz has proven that he can't survive a full year and I have doubts that he is the type of gamer that Lackey is in big games, never shown much mental toughness as far as I can see.  Lackey is inexpensive, especially for a 2-3 guy and it would be hard to get equal or better short term value for him in a trade.  The sox have enough prospects....if they move Lackey it would have to be for a younger MLB ready player who fills a need or extends what Lackey provides past 2015.  If I were Ben I would shop Dempster/Peavy around at the winter meetings and fill other needs (catcher, BP depth).  I would also take advantage of the current high market for RH power and shop Brentz and WMB around to see if someone would offer a crazy to pass up deal.  Brentz' numbers look good but he has holes that will get exposed....he strikes out a lot, not sure he is going to be the sure-fire regular RF that he is talked up to be.  Taking advantage of the current need for RH power could provide a good return right now.  I would also tell Lavarnway to sell his catchers equipment and invest in a 1B mitt and a good OF glove because that is where his future is with the Sox organization.  Don't really care if his agent likes it or not.....that is where he would be playing come spring training.  I think the stress of trying to become a good defensive catcher is really slowing his progress as a hitter and removing that stress might just create another RH bat that can be used as trade bait or depth in the OF/1B mix.   


    Once again, if the return makes sense, you have to seriously consider it.

    A system can always use more prospects. "We have enough prospects" is a ridiculous statement.

    Raw power is very hard to come by these days in MLB, so I wouldnt be so quick to trade ours. Yes, they both will probably have low OBP's, but both have 30+hr potential without the help of PED's. That, and if you can see holes in BB's swing like you said, then what makes you think pro scouts cant, thus not really netting us a good return. You can work on that kind of stuff. WMB is coming off a very bad year. Do you really think selling low on him now is smart? I sure dont. Thats why I suggested selling high on a 35yo Lackey.

    I wanted Lavarnway to buy a 1b mit a year ago. Hes not a good MLB catcher. Certainly not on a FT basis. Hes a big boy and seems to have lost his offense somewhat due to the demands, both physical and mental, that are put on a catcher at this level. He also just doesnt look very natural back there. Vasquez is a true catcher.

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

    Re: Would you trade Lackey for younger prospects ?

    'Selling high' sounds great, but it's somewhat of a buzz phrase too.  There's a huge amount of uncertainty involved.  I don't care if you're Bill James or Bill-806 - nobody knows exactly how many good years Lackey has left.  It might be 3 or 4.  Why couldn't he be a guy like Kuroda pitching his best at age 38?  Nobody knows.

    I just think it's highly probable that trading Lackey would weaken our starting rotation for the next two years. 

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

    Re: Would you trade Lackey for younger prospects ?

    In response to Hfxsoxnut's comment:

    'Selling high' sounds great, but it's somewhat of a buzz phrase too.  There's a huge amount of uncertainty involved.  I don't care if you're Bill James or Bill-806 - nobody knows exactly how many good years Lackey has left.  It might be 3 or 4.  Why couldn't he be a guy like Kuroda pitching his best at age 38?  Nobody knows.

    I just think it's highly probable that trading Lackey would weaken our starting rotation for the next two years. 




    Its a chance, but going back to the bottom line...If the return makes too much sense, then you take that chance, IMO.

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

    Re: Would you trade Lackey for younger prospects ?

    In response to southpaw777's comment:

    Its a chance, but going back to the bottom line...If the return makes too much sense, then you take that chance, IMO.



    I have faith in Cherington to make all those computations for both our short-term and long-term goals.

    I believe there's no more than a 10% chance Lackey gets traded.

    I think it's more like a 50% chance Dempster gets traded.

     

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

    Re: Would you trade Lackey for younger prospects ?

    In response to Hfxsoxnut's comment:

    In response to southpaw777's comment:

    Its a chance, but going back to the bottom line...If the return makes too much sense, then you take that chance, IMO.



    I have faith in Cherington to make all those computations for both our short-term and long-term goals.

    I believe there's no more than a 10% chance Lackey gets traded.

    I think it's more like a 50% chance Dempster gets traded.

     




    I also trust BC 100% and Ive also said I dont think it happens unless its an offer they can refuse.

    http://youtu.be/SeldwfOwuL8

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

    Re: Would you trade Lackey for younger prospects ?

    In response to southpaw777's comment:

    I ask this because the Dbacks really need, and are looking for a Pitcher like Lackey to solidify their rotation. At an average of 8.5M a year for 2 years, hes a great bargain. He would do well at Chase Field too.

    The Dbacks have loads of good young pitching, as well as position players, and are willing to deal some of their prospects for pitching. Im sure we could always add to the deal, but I think the Sox and Az match up good. Just a thought.



    I think we need to trade a pitcher or two plus prospects for a centerpiece.  We have more options now than ever in the starting rotation and on the farm.  I'm still not really high on Bradley or Middy being the next generation of fixtures in our lineup.

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

    Re: Would you trade Lackey for younger prospects ?

    In response to craze4sox's comment:

    In response to southpaw777's comment:

    I ask this because the Dbacks really need, and are looking for a Pitcher like Lackey to solidify their rotation. At an average of 8.5M a year for 2 years, hes a great bargain. He would do well at Chase Field too.

    The Dbacks have loads of good young pitching, as well as position players, and are willing to deal some of their prospects for pitching. Im sure we could always add to the deal, but I think the Sox and Az match up good. Just a thought.



    I think we need to trade a pitcher or two plus prospects for a centerpiece.  We have more options now than ever in the starting rotation and on the farm.  I'm still not really high on Bradley or Middy being the next generation of fixtures in our lineup.



    Hey craze, havent seen ya in a minute. Hope you had a nice TG.

    So, If a team offered a package like the Royals did with the Rays for Lackey and say...Alex Wilson or Brian Johnson, would you take it?

    I would.

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

    Re: Would you trade Lackey for younger prospects ?

    In response to southpaw777's comment:

    In response to craze4sox's comment:

    In response to southpaw777's comment:

    I ask this because the Dbacks really need, and are looking for a Pitcher like Lackey to solidify their rotation. At an average of 8.5M a year for 2 years, hes a great bargain. He would do well at Chase Field too.

    The Dbacks have loads of good young pitching, as well as position players, and are willing to deal some of their prospects for pitching. Im sure we could always add to the deal, but I think the Sox and Az match up good. Just a thought.



    I think we need to trade a pitcher or two plus prospects for a centerpiece.  We have more options now than ever in the starting rotation and on the farm.  I'm still not really high on Bradley or Middy being the next generation of fixtures in our lineup.




    If a team offered a package like the Royals did with the Rays for Lackey and say...Alex Wilson or Brian Johnson, would you take it?

    I would.



    Yes, If the package brought us a player like Myers.  I think the Will Myers trade was a brilliant move by the Rays.  It should give them another Longoria type in the lineup for many years. 

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

    Re: Would you trade Lackey for younger prospects ?

    In response to craze4sox's comment:

    In response to southpaw777's comment:

    In response to craze4sox's comment:

    In response to southpaw777's comment:

    I ask this because the Dbacks really need, and are looking for a Pitcher like Lackey to solidify their rotation. At an average of 8.5M a year for 2 years, hes a great bargain. He would do well at Chase Field too.

    The Dbacks have loads of good young pitching, as well as position players, and are willing to deal some of their prospects for pitching. Im sure we could always add to the deal, but I think the Sox and Az match up good. Just a thought.



    I think we need to trade a pitcher or two plus prospects for a centerpiece.  We have more options now than ever in the starting rotation and on the farm.  I'm still not really high on Bradley or Middy being the next generation of fixtures in our lineup.




    If a team offered a package like the Royals did with the Rays for Lackey and say...Alex Wilson or Brian Johnson, would you take it?

    I would.



    Yes, I think the Will Myers trade was a brilliant move by the Rays.  It should give them another Longoria type in the lineup for many years. 




    This is what Im trying to tell everyone. I dont just want to trade away a pitcher just because we have a bunch. Nor do I want to just let a guy like Lackey go for peanuts. But a return like Wil Myers, Jake Odorizzi, Patrick Leonard, and Mike Montgomery? Yeah, thats a no Brainer IMHO.

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

    Re: Would you trade Lackey for younger prospects ?

    In response to southpaw777's comment:

    In response to craze4sox's comment:

    In response to southpaw777's comment:

    In response to craze4sox's comment:

    In response to southpaw777's comment:

    I ask this because the Dbacks really need, and are looking for a Pitcher like Lackey to solidify their rotation. At an average of 8.5M a year for 2 years, hes a great bargain. He would do well at Chase Field too.

    The Dbacks have loads of good young pitching, as well as position players, and are willing to deal some of their prospects for pitching. Im sure we could always add to the deal, but I think the Sox and Az match up good. Just a thought.



    I think we need to trade a pitcher or two plus prospects for a centerpiece.  We have more options now than ever in the starting rotation and on the farm.  I'm still not really high on Bradley or Middy being the next generation of fixtures in our lineup.




    If a team offered a package like the Royals did with the Rays for Lackey and say...Alex Wilson or Brian Johnson, would you take it?

    I would.



    Yes, I think the Will Myers trade was a brilliant move by the Rays.  It should give them another Longoria type in the lineup for many years. 




    This is what Im trying to tell everyone. I dont just want to trade away a pitcher just because we have a bunch. Nor do I want to just let a guy like Lackey go for peanuts. But a return like Wil Myers, Jake Odorizzi, Patrick Leonard, and Mike Montgomery? Yeah, thats a no Brainer IMHO.



    We did a great job finding the right mix of complimentry players last season but at some point I would love to stop hearing how many great potential prospects we may have and the word (BRIDGE) to get there.  I do believe Bogy will be the real deal but a 3B (Machado type) at some point not SS so I would bring back Drew for insurance and sign M. Young next season for back up at multiple positions. 

    Outside of Bogy?  I don't see Bradley as the next Jacoby or Middy ever having the plate discipline to help our lineup all that much at 3B or 1B.  I would go after a Stanton type, or do our best to solidify 1B for the future next season if we don't want Nap back long term.

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

    Re: Would you trade Lackey for younger prospects ?

    In response to Hfxsoxnut's comment:

    'Selling high' sounds great, but it's somewhat of a buzz phrase too.  There's a huge amount of uncertainty involved.  I don't care if you're Bill James or Bill-806 - nobody knows exactly how many good years Lackey has left.  It might be 3 or 4.  Why couldn't he be a guy like Kuroda pitching his best at age 38?  Nobody knows.

    I just think it's highly probable that trading Lackey would weaken our starting rotation for the next two years. 



    1-I'm not a big believer in the 'sell high' concept.  Other GMs see the data that we see, and are a lot more competent at interpreting it.  Having said that, I think fans are over-estimating Lackey's ability to have a good season.

    In 2009, there were 4 SPs that were 34 year's old, had > 150 IPs, and an ERA < 4.00.  They were

    • 2009-Carpenter (7.8), Millwood (2.0), Washburn (DNP) and Kawakami (DNP)
    • 2010-Pavano (3.3), Hudson (5.4), and Lilly (0.4)
    • 2011-Halladay (1.7), Vazquez (DNP), Chen (3.4), Wolf (0.5)

    So there were 11 SPs that accomplished what Lackey did.  Over the following two years, 1 was outstanding, 1 was good, 2 were mediocre, 4 were bad, and 3 never pitched again.

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

    Re: Would you trade Lackey for younger prospects ?

    In response to Joebreidey's comment:

    In response to Hfxsoxnut's comment:

    'Selling high' sounds great, but it's somewhat of a buzz phrase too.  There's a huge amount of uncertainty involved.  I don't care if you're Bill James or Bill-806 - nobody knows exactly how many good years Lackey has left.  It might be 3 or 4.  Why couldn't he be a guy like Kuroda pitching his best at age 38?  Nobody knows.

    I just think it's highly probable that trading Lackey would weaken our starting rotation for the next two years. 



    1-I'm not a big believer in the 'sell high' concept.  Other GMs see the data that we see, and are a lot more competent at interpreting it.  Having said that, I think fans are over-estimating Lackey's ability to have a good season.

    In 2009, there were 4 SPs that were 34 year's old, had > 150 IPs, and an ERA < 4.00.  They were

    • 2009-Carpenter (7.8), Millwood (2.0), Washburn (DNP) and Kawakami (DNP)
    • 2010-Pavano (3.3), Hudson (5.4), and Lilly (0.4)
    • 2011-Halladay (1.7), Vazquez (DNP), Chen (3.4), Wolf (0.5)

    So there were 11 SPs that accomplished what Lackey did.  Over the following two years, 1 was outstanding, 1 was good, 2 were mediocre, 4 were bad, and 3 never pitched again.



    I hate to say this but Buchholz may be the logical centerpiece of any trade that could bring us a future OF or 1B.  Clay has yet to pitch 200 innings or become the Ace we expected because of health issues which is a huge concern.  I don't want to trade Clay but I think teams would be much more likely to trade a young star for a Buchholz package, rather than a pitcher coming off TJ who had a solid year. 

    Lackey or Peavy would probably need to be packaged with more prospects than Clay but the right combination of players could still get just about any deal done in my opinion because of our deep farm.

     

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share