Sox Lester agree on 5 year deal

[ORS]

Here is a Q&A with Rays owner Stu Sternberg:

 

Read this...and realize that unlike that hypocritical piece of s*** Henry, here's a guy who speaks the truth. I'd say enjoy, but heaven forbid I point out someone in Red Sox fantasy land is a dumbass. I wonder if he would have changed his tune if he tried to sign Burrell and then lost him to the Yankees after he offered him 100K less than he was asking.

What's funny is that you read that and think it validates your points against a salary cap simply because he says he's not in favor of a cap. The whole idea behind a cap is leveling the competitive balance, something that Sternberg admits needs to be done. He says he's not in favor of a cap and floor without expanded revenue sharing, and he says he's of the opinion that expanded revenue sharing isn't going to happen, therefore, he's thinking of ways to fix the competitive balance without a cap.

 

Try reading for the actual content and not just words that validate what you want to hear next time.

[BSN07]

Gom I can't believe your fighting this so much. Think of it this way, if the Sox did raise the market for signing young pitchers, and if that contributes to smaller market teams not being able to sign their younger players, it will lead to more FA's hitting the market. Thus giving the Yankees the advantage of over bidding and signing those players that might have been re-upped by their original club.

 

 

If every team signs their own players, how will the Yankees ever field a competitive team?

[Gom]

What's funny is that you read that and think it validates your points against a salary cap simply because he says he's not in favor of a cap. The whole idea behind a cap is leveling the competitive balance, something that Sternberg admits needs to be done. He says he's not in favor of a cap and floor without expanded revenue sharing, and he says he's of the opinion that expanded revenue sharing isn't going to happen, therefore, he's thinking of ways to fix the competitive balance without a cap.

 

Try reading for the actual content and not just words that validate what you want to hear next time.

 

Wow...talk about the pot calling the kettle black.

 

What I was showing was an honest owner calling for competitive balance and not someone who whines about one or two particular deals in which his team was directly involved.

 

Gom I can't believe your fighting this so much. Think of it this way, if the Sox did raise the market for signing young pitchers, and if that contributes to smaller market teams not being able to sign their younger players, it will lead to more FA's hitting the market. Thus giving the Yankees the advantage of over bidding and signing those players that might have been re-upped by their original club.

 

 

If every team signs their own players, how will the Yankees ever field a competitive team?

 

This wasn't arguing about the team, and you know it. Just worry about Papelbon coming over when he's a free agent. This homegrown talent you are so proud of is a recent development, and is not a guarantee to continue. Without Manny being signed as a free agent, we'd still be chanting 1918.

 

What's funny is that you a lot of you guys think star players will keep coming up. You sound like Yankee fans.

[ORS]

Wow...talk about the pot calling the kettle black.

 

What I was showing was an honest owner calling for competitive balance and not someone who whines about one or two particular deals in which his team was directly involved.

Henry called for a cap when he was the owner of the Marlins, but that doesn't count now, right? Full of dung.

[Gom]

Henry called for a cap when he was the owner of the Marlins' date=' but that doesn't count now, right? Full of dung.[/quote']

I don't remember reading that. Do you have any proof of him saying this?

[example1]

I didn't realize Henry was unique here. Come to think of...I think every owner in the history of all sports would want that...but what do I know?

 

Apparently not much, Gom. One owner brags about being able to spend 40% more, calling themselves the "stimulus plan" for the rest of baseball... as if it is something imposed on him by baseball, rather than a choice he's making. The Yankees are spending more money than they have to to field a good team, and when challenged on it they pretend it is charity. To everyone else it doesn't appear that the Yankees are in the business of 'saving money'. They still 'make money' but they're not being very efficient.

 

Buddy...have you been paying attention to this thread? I didn't say they didn't make good deals, didn't build a good team...JEEZ...all I said was...hell...I'll give you a clue...he signed a deal that blew away the previous ______________ [rhymes witch "decadent"].

 

Nobody gives two shits about the precedent Gom! It's a useless and silly argument. The amount that the Red Sox value a pitcher relative to a hitter is a strategic decision. Based on WARP Lester was the 3rd most valuable player on the team last year (7.9). Ryan Howard had a WARP of 5.0. Cole Hamels had 7.9.

 

If the Sox FO believes that Lester can keep up that level of production (3rd most valuable player on a playoff caliber team) then what is the flaw in paying him relative to other players at similar points in their careers? Why make the arbitrary distinction of pitchers? It's all about wins, on one side of the ball or the other. When/if he reached FA there would be no such distinction.

 

Furthermore, I DO think the fact that Lester has been around as long in the league as Hanley Ramirez or Cole Hamels plays a role here. I think there is no chance that they would offer this contract if it was Lester's 1+ season. There's no precedent for Henry doing things that are patently stupid in terms of paying players too much just for the hell of it. In fact, given that this deal didn't actually happen, there's not even anything for you to be complaining about in the first place...

 

...and if there is a SINGLE Red Sox fan who after reading this post doesn't think so, then that fan is a complete moron, I'm sorry to say.

 

If there's a single person who reads this statement and doesn't think you have the biggest ego of just about any poster, that person is a complete moron. Your grandiosity is alarming.

 

I see virtually no correlation between Henry's desire to have a salary cap, and his reported willingness to sign a third year pitcher to a five-year deal that is well within the AAV range of other top third year players, and which pays considerably less than the top 4th, 5th and 6th year contracts.

 

Furthermore, I have no way of knowing whether Henry has only advocated a salary cap twice in his life and frankly, neither do you. He could be a guy who talks about it openly at parties and in private discussions.

 

The fact that you're so quick to make that assumption tells me that your so-called "objectivity" is very shallow. I see someone with a lot of distaste for the actions of the owner of his hated rival's baseball team. Nothing wrong with that, but you're not objective. Sorry.

[Gom]

Apparently not much' date=' Gom. One owner brags about being able to spend 40% more, calling themselves the "stimulus plan" for the rest of baseball... as if it is something imposed on him by baseball, rather than a choice he's making. [/quote']

His choice. At least he's not hypocritical about his spending.

The Yankees are spending more money than they have to to field a good team, and when challenged on it they pretend it is charity.

Who are you to determine how much money they should spend? Last I checked, the owners of the team make that decision. As fans, we question and judge them..but it's their choice.

To everyone else it doesn't appear that the Yankees are in the business of 'saving money'. They still 'make money' but they're not being very efficient.

Find me one time I said the Yankees were "efficient" in their spending.

Nobody gives two shits about the precedent Gom!

Really? Then when a team signs a player for $40 million more than anyone else does...who cares? When a team outspends the next team by nearly 30%, who cares? Why sign a comparable player fox X dollars...when you can sign a similar player for double the price? This quote is possibly the dumbest thing you've ever said example1, and you're not prone to dumb statments.

It's a useless and silly argument. The amount that the Red Sox value a pitcher relative to a hitter is a strategic decision. Based on WARP Lester was the 3rd most valuable player on the team last year (7.9). Ryan Howard had a WARP of 5.0. Cole Hamels had 7.9.

In this aspect, I am on the fence. I think that pitching is more important than hitting myself, but I also think that pitching is harder to predict. That is the reason, in my opinion, that pitchers make less than hitters early in their careers [arbitration]. Since this is the case, it's not fair to equate pitchers and hitters in this example, which is what I have been saying.

If the Sox FO believes that Lester can keep up that level of production (3rd most valuable player on a playoff caliber team) then what is the flaw in paying him relative to other players at similar points in their careers?

You really can't be serious. For the zillionth time, I never said it was a bad idea for the Sox....and THE ENTIRE REASON FOR MY POST WAS THAT HENRY WASN'T PAYING HIM A RELATIVE SALARY, BUT A GROSSLY INFLATED ONE.

Why make the arbitrary distinction of pitchers? It's all about wins, on one side of the ball or the other. When/if he reached FA there would be no such distinction.

Already answered.

Furthermore, I DO think the fact that Lester has been around as long in the league as Hanley Ramirez or Cole Hamels plays a role here. I think there is no chance that they would offer this contract if it was Lester's 1+ season.

So can we say the same thing about Hughes? What about Joba? They've both been injured. If you remember, going into last season, very few people thought Lester was worth more than Buchholz. Nearly everyone thought that putting Lester in the Santana deal would be good. Lester, for the most part, was a nice end of the rotation starter, while Buchholz was an ace in the making. My goodness....

There's no precedent for Henry doing things that are patently stupid in terms of paying players too much just for the hell of it.

Lugo...I can't remember anyone commending him on the deal WHEN it was signed.

In fact, given that this deal didn't actually happen, there's not even anything for you to be complaining about in the first place...

I debate things, just like you. It just baffles me that you can't be objective here.

If there's a single person who reads this statement and doesn't think you have the biggest ego of just about any poster, that person is a complete moron. Your grandiosity is alarming.

I do have a huge ego, I admit. However, this wasn't an ego-driven comment, it was a logical one.

I see virtually no correlation between Henry's desire to have a salary cap, and his reported willingness to sign a third year pitcher to a five-year deal that is well within the AAV range of other top third year players, and which pays considerably less than the top 4th, 5th and 6th year contracts.

Ok..so 60% more than a comparable player, one that is nearly identical in WHIP and ERA and age is well within the AAV range of a player with the same service time? In a worse economic time...where players like Abreu took $10 million paycuts? Yeah that makes sense...about as much sense as comparing a player who has two years of eligibility and is not eligible for arbitration to a super two/three who is eligible for arbitration.

Furthermore, I have no way of knowing whether Henry has only advocated a salary cap twice in his life and frankly, neither do you. He could be a guy who talks about it openly at parties and in private discussions.

WTF? Ok...so Jeter said that Ortiz is piece of s*** who injected steroids and human growth hormone and is covering up his own usage by talking about it as a misdirection tactic. He never said it..but I believe I heard it from someone who knows his doorman who heard one of his one night stands say it as she left in the morning.

The fact that you're so quick to make that assumption tells me that your so-called "objectivity" is very shallow. I see someone with a lot of distaste for the actions of the owner of his hated rival's baseball team. Nothing wrong with that, but you're not objective. Sorry.

I have a very strong dislike for Henry for being a two-faced self-serving liar. I respect people for what they do and what they say. I like Epstein, and wish he worked for the Yankees. I am not a fan of Lucchino, and I despise Henry. I like Pedroia for the way he plays the game and gets more out of his talent than probably anyone in baseball. The fact that one of my favorite players, Jeter, has gotten friendly with Pedroia shows me that they are both probably the same type of player, just wearing different uniforms. I get the feeling that these guys would probably play the game for free on the streets of a city. I hate Youkilis for seeminly caring more about his personal stats and having temper-tantrums every time he strikes out. I hated Ortiz [and I love watching this replay] when he cut out cups and stuck them on his ears as if he couldn't hear the crowd when the Red Sox were up 5-2 in game 7 of the 2003 ALCS. This has been off-set and dwarfed by his charitable golf tournament which drew some of baseball's biggest stars to help, among other things, children who need heart surgery.

 

Henry is full of s***. If you can't see it, you're just not objective, and the lack the ability to do so. When you can be as critical of your team as I am of mine, come and talk to me.

[example1]

Really? Then when a team signs a player for $40 million more than anyone else does...who cares? When a team outspends the next team by nearly 30%, who cares? Why sign a comparable player fox X dollars...when you can sign a similar player for double the price? This quote is possibly the dumbest thing you've ever said example1, and you're not prone to dumb statments.

 

I said "Nobody gives two shits about the precedent Gom!". I didn't say "Nobody gives two shits about precedent Gom!", nor did I say "Nobody gives two shits about a precedent Gom!". I said Nobody gives two shits about the precedent Gom!" Your precedent was pitchers with more than two seasons of experience. I don't agree that Carmona is an exact comparison. They have the same amount of experience, yet Lester signed his (theoretical) deal a year later. We disagree about that, but one of them played an extra season before signing the contract. More proof, more data, no precedent.

 

That said, nobody gives two shits about the precedent Gom. It is arbitrary. Wins are what matters.

 

You really can't be serious. For the zillionth time, I never said it was a bad idea for the Sox....and THE ENTIRE REASON FOR MY POST WAS THAT HENRY WASN'T PAYING HIM A RELATIVE SALARY, BUT A GROSSLY INFLATED ONE.

 

And yet Lester (theoretically) signed a deal a year later than Carmona, and there is no reason that a pitcher's salary needs to be compared solely to other pitchers. Wins produced for the team are much more important... again.

 

 

So can we say the same thing about Hughes? What about Joba? They've both been injured.

 

Hughes and Joba both have 1+ seasons of experience. Lester has 2+ seasons of experience. Lester and Joba could be compared to Carmona. Lester's experience equates him more closely with Hamels. They are both at 2+ seasons of experience.

 

If you remember, going into last season, very few people thought Lester was worth more than Buchholz. Nearly everyone thought that putting Lester in the Santana deal would be good. Lester, for the most part, was a nice end of the rotation starter, while Buchholz was an ace in the making. My goodness....

 

Right, but all that matters is what the Sox FO thinks of his on-field value, right? I mean, it seems that the Sox thought he was worth a lot and it seems like they were right. All of us who see a rookie with cancer pitch a few games can talk all we want, but pitching coaches, and GMs get a much better view.

 

Lugo...I can't remember anyone commending him on the deal WHEN it was signed.

 

I didn't say every deal Henry made was a good deal. I said that there aren't examples of him wasting money. Lugo is a bad deal, we all see that. But in the 'hierarchy' of FA SS, he's lodged between the contracts of Edgar Renteria and Christian Guzman. He's well within the margin of starting shortstops on good teams... he's just disappointed.

 

Ok..so 60% more than a comparable player, one that is nearly identical in WHIP and ERA and age is well within the AAV range of a player with the same service time?

 

One player signed (in this hypothetical) a season earlier than the other. One player had 2+ years of MLB service, the other had 1+ season. The comparison is useful for you, but it is misleading.

 

 

WTF? Ok...so Jeter said that Ortiz is piece of s*** who injected steroids and human growth hormone and is covering up his own usage by talking about it as a misdirection tactic. He never said it..but I believe I heard it from someone who knows his doorman who heard one of his one night stands say it as she left in the morning.

 

The point isn't that I can make s*** up or pretend stuff happened. The point is that you are making a character judgment based on what you think you know of one person's opinion.

 

Am I wrong to presume that you don't know John Henry?

 

Am I wrong to presume that you don't actually know he personal views on a salary cap, and what he actually wishes were the case?

 

As a mental health professional, when I know someone has a big ego, and I hear them making all encompassing claims about someone who they don't know and only hear periodically, I assume that person is running more on ego and blowhardary than that they are being balanced and reasonable.

 

 

I have a very strong dislike for Henry for being a two-faced self-serving liar.

 

Again, I find those words pretty harsh for someone that you don't know and have only limited knowledge about. You are assuming that he doesn't REALLY want a salary cap, which is questioning someone's ingegrity on limited facts. It takes a pretty small person (or pretty egotistical one) to go so far so boldly.

 

I respect people for what they do and what they say. I like Epstein, and wish he worked for the Yankees. I am not a fan of Lucchino, and I despise Henry. I like Pedroia for the way he plays the game and gets more out of his talent than probably anyone in baseball. The fact that one of my favorite players, Jeter, has gotten friendly with Pedroia shows me that they are both probably the same type of player, just wearing different uniforms. I get the feeling that these guys would probably play the game for free on the streets of a city. I hate Youkilis for seeminly caring more about his personal stats and having temper-tantrums every time he strikes out. I hated Ortiz [and I love watching this replay] when he cut out cups and stuck them on his ears as if he couldn't hear the crowd when the Red Sox were up 5-2 in game 7 of the 2003 ALCS. This has been off-set and dwarfed by his charitable golf tournament which drew some of baseball's biggest stars to help, among other things, children who need heart surgery.

 

I can just imagine you, lying on your bed, red marker in hand, going through your 2009 Baseball Yearbook, crossing out the faces of people you "hate" and writing exclaimation points next to the names of your faves. I can see you cutting out magazine pictures and posting them on your wall, and calling your friends "oh. my. god. Did you hear what Youkilis said today! What a luzr!"

 

Henry is full of s***. If you can't see it, you're just not objective, and the lack the ability to do so. When you can be as critical of your team as I am of mine, come and talk to me.

 

There's a lot more to be critical about concerning the Yankees than there is about the Sox. The Sox have a good farm system, a good team, they are on TV all the time, they have fun players to watch, and they seem interested in being competitive for a long time. They have won a World Series in the past two years and two of the past four, and they have made the playoffs under this ownership group in 5 of 6 seasons. :dunno:

 

Just because you're able to be critical doesn't mean you're able to be objective. Sometimes a good thing is a good thing.

[example1]

All that said Gom, I'm pretty sick of this discussion on the non-finalized deal. Enjoy your rage with John Henry.

[Gom]

Just a few more things...

 

And yet Lester (theoretically) signed a deal a year later than Carmona, and there is no reason that a pitcher's salary needs to be compared solely to other pitchers. Wins produced for the team are much more important... again.

Although he signed the deal a year later, they were both considered equivalent service time players. Apples to apples.

Hughes and Joba both have 1+ seasons of experience. Lester has 2+ seasons of experience. Lester and Joba could be compared to Carmona. Lester's experience equates him more closely with Hamels. They are both at 2+ seasons of experience.

No. Unless you count Joba and Hughes one person. Then, depending on how you name it, it would be called Hughba of Jughes [pronounced "jews"]

I didn't say every deal Henry made was a good deal. I said that there aren't examples of him wasting money. Lugo is a bad deal, we all see that.

Umm...what?

The point isn't that I can make s*** up or pretend stuff happened. The point is that you are making a character judgment based on what you think you know of one person's opinion.

 

Am I wrong to presume that you don't know John Henry?

There isn't a single one of us that knows any of these people except for what we read or see on TV. From what I've seen, he's full of s***.

Am I wrong to presume that you don't actually know he personal views on a salary cap, and what he actually wishes were the case?

From his statements in the press..which is what all of us really ever know, I know what he's said.

As a mental health professional...

I can just imagine you, lying on your bed, red marker in hand, going through your 2009 Baseball Yearbook, crossing out the faces of people you "hate" and writing exclaimation points next to the names of your faves. I can see you cutting out magazine pictures and posting them on your wall, and calling your friends "oh. my. god. Did you hear what Youkilis said today! What a luzr!"

The fact that you claim to be a mental health professional is truly frightening. Were you one of the people in this article?

Just because you're able to be critical doesn't mean you're able to be objective. Sometimes a good thing is a good thing.

Yes, but when you're NEVER critical, you're not objective. I agree to let this pass and see where it goes. However, I have a feeling that someone in the Red Sox FO pointed out the discrepency I was trying to point out [maybe even the commish's office]. I'd be curious to see what Lester signs for.

[example1]

There isn't a single one of us that knows any of these people except for what we read or see on TV. From what I've seen, he's full of s***.

 

And from what you've seen, you've seen very little.

 

From his statements in the press..which is what all of us really ever know, I know what he's said.

 

So you assume that's all there is then? His statements to the press make up your entire opinion in this case, No benefit of the doubt, lots of jumping to conclusions... that, to me, reveals a bias of one sort or another.

 

The fact that you claim to be a mental health professional is truly frightening. Were you one of the people in this article?

 

Yes, Gom. I was one of the people in Texas who was starting a fight club with clients.

 

Yes, but when you're NEVER critical, you're not objective.

 

Hey Gom. Nobody is objective. We all try to be as objective as possible. I can be critical when needed, I just tend to give this FO the benefit of the doubt, especially in areas where their access would give them a decided advantage in scouting a player, or when their moves have tended to work out well.

 

I agree to let this pass and see where it goes. However, I have a feeling that someone in the Red Sox FO pointed out the discrepency I was trying to point out [maybe even the commish's office]. I'd be curious to see what Lester signs for.

 

 

Ohh, a feeling that they pointed out the discrepency. They didn't have any clue whether their own player was a super two, or a 1+ or a 2+ who had cancer. Good thing they had second thoughts then, huh?

[example1]

http://www.boston.com/sports/baseball/redsox/extras/extra_bases/2009/03/lester_physical.html

 

Lester getting a physical this weekend before signing the longterm deal.

[BoSox21]

OMG, BASEBALL IS RUINED!!!! *jumps off bridge*

[Dipre]

Why anyone would continue to argue with Gom and validate his flawed logic is beyond me.

 

He's wrong, his statement is full of ********, but he won't ever, EVER admit it.

 

So just ignore him and his yankee fanboy bias.

 

Precedent, lol, talk about a load of bull.

[rician blast]

Without Manny being signed as a free agent' date=' [b']we'd still be chanting 1918. [/b]

 

Love when a Yankee fan incriminates himself. Yeah, yeah 1918, 26-?, etc. all part of the reason Yankee fans have the rep they do.

 

I bet in your mind Bucky Dent won the 78 playoff series for the Yanks right? And Buckner lost the 86 world series for the Sox?

 

FYI, it was the Red Sox TEAM that won in 2004 and 2007, not an individual player...but if you want to harp on FA's, teams with management that want to win and have $ to spend go after FAs. The Sox signing Manny is not some anomoly.

 

FA signings are part of the game...some teams just do it better than others and are more conservative than others. The Yankees, recently, don't fall into either camp.

[BSN07]

If not for Free Agency, the Yankees would be a last place team every year.

[BoSox21]

To be fair, the only free agents they have on their roster are Sabathia, Burnett, Damon, Matsui, Teixeira and Pettitte

[Cocos Disciples]

If not for Free Agency' date=' the Yankees would be a last place team every year.[/quote']

 

lol

[example1]

To be fair' date=' the only free agents they have on their roster are Sabathia, Burnett, Damon, Matsui, Teixeira and Pettitte[/quote']

 

I'm pretty sure A-Rod was officially a FA when they resigned him after 07, wasn't he? He cancelled his contract with the team and they resigned him.

[Cocos Disciples]

If there was no free agency, he wouldn't have opted out.

[Gom]

Why anyone would continue to argue with Gom and validate his flawed logic is beyond me.

 

He's wrong, his statement is full of ********, but he won't ever, EVER admit it.

 

So just ignore him and his yankee fanboy bias.

 

Precedent, lol, talk about a load of bull.

Coming from you, this is a compliment.

 

When you understand about finances, and not government handouts, come talk to me.

 

Quick quiz, you idiot. What have I been saying? What's the point I'm trying to make here? No one answer this. Let him go back and try to figure out what I have been trying to say.

[example1]

Coming from you, this is a compliment.

 

When you understand about finances, and not government handouts, come talk to me.

 

Quick quiz, you idiot. What have I been saying? What's the point I'm trying to make here? No one answer this. Let him go back and try to figure out what I have been trying to say.

 

Your argument is somewhat convoluted... not because you have been unclear (I think you tend to articulate yourself well) but because the standards that you choose to harp on seem arbitrary and certainly pale in comparison to standards that most other people would deem reasonable (say, FA signings).

 

I'll let him try to articulate your argument and won't do it for him, but frankly I think very few people agree with you that your concern is either valid or important.

[Gom]

Team A signed Joba for 423,000. Team B has 100 more career innings. Gets 30 million. 60% more than any other pitcher in a similar standing with similar stats.

 

Every team has the right to do what they want.

 

When Team B starts complaining about salaries and spending sprees...Well, Team B should look in the mirror. End of story.

[Gom]

Your argument is somewhat convoluted... not because you have been unclear (I think you tend to articulate yourself well) but because the standards that you choose to harp on seem arbitrary and certainly pale in comparison to standards that most other people would deem reasonable (say, FA signings).

 

I'll let him try to articulate your argument and won't do it for him, but frankly I think very few people agree with you that your concern is either valid or important.

 

Go look at my plan for the Yankees, 2009. Check the date. Check what I predicted for salaries for free agents who I would have signed for the Yankees. In comparing what the players I predicted to sign with the Yankees, Here is the results. Here' the link for any of you who want to check.

 

Check the 36th post in the thread. Dated 9/29.

 

CC predicted: 7 years, 140 million.

CC actual: 7 years, 161 million.

Difference of 3 million a year, I missed by 13%.

 

Pettitte predicted: 1 year 8 million

Pettitte actual: Assuming Pettitte pitches 180IP [he's averaged 195 for his career, including his injury plagues 2004], he would earn 7.75 million, with an additional 0.3 million, bringing him up to 8.05 million. If he pitches more or less, the value will change, but as of now, with my subjective analysis, I'd say I missed by less than 1%.

 

AJ predicted: 16 million per year

AJ actual: 16.5 million per year

I missed by less than 4 percent.

 

So, example1....

 

I think when you say that the standards that I "choose to harp on seem arbitrary and certainly pale in comparison to standards that most other people would deem reasonable (say, FA signings)", I think you're talking out of your ass.

 

I seem to either know what I'm talking about, or my guesses are unbelievably lucky.

 

Once again..the deal is good for Lester, could be good for the Sox, and bad for baseball. Bad for baseball because it sets a new and more expensive precedent in a very bad economic time. This is coming from a guy who cries and whines about a cap. I'm pointing out the OBVIOUS that it's disingenious to believe what he says about curbing spending when he does it himself.

[Dipre]

Gom, this is not about economics.

 

It's about you trying to convince everyone that something is wrong and hurts baseball when it really doesn't.

 

It only hurts baseball in your simple mind because you have your yankee bias, and a double-standard about their wild spending and how THAT is bad for baseball, so you come out trying to explain how the long-term signing of a homegrown player is "bad for baseball" just after the yankee spend 400+ million on 3 FAs.

 

You are insincere, and you're so fake even GW jr. could see through you.

 

So save your ********, no one here is having it.

[example1]

Go look at my plan for the Yankees' date=' 2009. Check the date. Check what I predicted for salaries for free agents who I would have signed for the Yankees. In comparing what the players I predicted to sign with the Yankees, Here is the results. Here' the link for any of you who want to check.

 

Check the 36th post in the thread. Dated 9/29.

 

CC predicted: 7 years, 140 million.

CC actual: 7 years, 161 million.

Difference of 3 million a year, I missed by 13%.

 

Pettitte predicted: 1 year 8 million

Pettitte actual: Assuming Pettitte pitches 180IP [he's averaged 195 for his career, including his injury plagues 2004], he would earn 7.75 million, with an additional 0.3 million, bringing him up to 8.05 million. If he pitches more or less, the value will change, but as of now, with my subjective analysis, I'd say I missed by less than 1%.

 

AJ predicted: 16 million per year

AJ actual: 16.5 million per year

I missed by less than 4 percent.

 

So, example1....

 

I think when you say that the standards that I "choose to harp on seem arbitrary and certainly pale in comparison to standards that most other people would deem reasonable (say, FA signings)", I think you're talking out of your ass.

 

You think I'm talking out of my ass anyway Gom.

 

I read you saying that "nobody said anything" with the big FA signings of CC and Burnett. I said something, other people here said stuff. I heard many radio commentators and TV personalities talking about it, particularly how much higher the Yankees bid--against themselves--to get CC. I showed in a very long (and time consuming post) that Burnett was the most expensive FA signing in cost per marginal win, if you take the average marginal win value over the 4 seasons prior to the signing.

 

http://www.talksox.com/forum/talk-sox-forum/11850-smoltz-not-far-behind-9.html#post378909

 

Not only was Burnett the least accoplished of the top pitchers ever in AAV, his best season was the lowest best season of all of those pitchers. The Yankees grossly overpaid for a pitcher with his track record. That sets a precedent. Now all pitchers will want Burnett money for s***** career numbers, right? Hell, Matt Cain will be worth 20m a year now, because it's precedent.

 

Now, there's a precedent that you don't care about. To you it doesn't matter, which is exactly how most people seem to feel about your "he's a 2+ player with a year more experience than Carmona when signing the deal, but thanks to a strange glitch having to do with Lester's cancer, he isn't officially a "super two", so it's a horrible deal, while Cole Hamels' deal is just fine. Also, this is only counting pitchers, because hitters are deemed easier to predict by some people so they deserve more money even though they don't necessarily win more games for the team, so don't comment on Robinson Cano's deal because they aren't comparable".

 

I seem to either know what I'm talking about, or my guesses are unbelievably lucky.

 

This has nothing to do with whether people see those dollar figures as too high, or whether you are aware that that's how people feel. You have convinced yourself that nobody complains about the Yankees top signings because they don't openly protest or stop playing altogether.

 

Once again..the deal is good for Lester, could be good for the Sox, and bad for baseball. Bad for baseball because it sets a new and more expensive precedent in a very bad economic time.

 

I don't see why any team trying to work out a deal with a 1+ year pitcher can't say "We believe that Jon Lester's deal was based on him having already pitched 2 full seasons of baseball and that it did not set precedent for 1+ year players. If you would like to pitch another full season then we can talk about a deal in the same camp as Lester. Otherwise we're working in Fausto Carmona territory now" The player can take their offer or not, but no team will be forced to make such a deal when Lester had pitched nearly a full season more before signing the deal.

 

Lester's 6m a year will look puny by the time it is in the 3rd year. A precedent is only as good as the consensus that it is a precedent. There are plenty of ways that teams can get around this as a rock solid precedent... whether you think there are or not. Teams will not now be forced to pay their players more.

[example1]

The Red Sox signing of Lester is bad for baseball. John Henry is a hypocrite.

 

Cot's says this is the deal:

 

Jon Lester lhp

5 years/$30M (2009-13), plus 2014 club option

5 years/$30M (2009-13), plus 2014 club option

signed extension with Boston 3/15/09

09:$1M, 10:$3.75M, 11:$5.75M, 12:$7.625M, 13:$11.625M, 14:$13M club option ($0.25M buyout)

2014 club option is voided if Lester is traded and has finished first or second in Cy Young vote any season from 2009 to 2013

award bonuses: $50,000 each for All Star, LCS MVP; $0.1M for WS MVP; $0.1M for Cy Young ($75,000 for 2nd place, $50,000 for 3rd); $0.1M for MVP ($75,000 for 2nd place, $50,000 for 3rd)

[BSN07]

To be fair' date=' the only free agents they have on their roster are Sabathia, Burnett, Damon, Matsui, Teixeira and Pettitte[/quote']

 

But take away Arod, CC ,AJ, Matsui, Tex and Peittitte, and like I said, the Yankees are a last place team.

 

In comparison, take away, Drew, Lugo, Tek, Saito, Penny, Smoltz from the Sox and they can still contend.

[diony]

If not for Free Agency' date=' the Yankees would be a last place team every year.[/quote']

 

You can say that about most teams.

[BSN07]

You can say that about most teams.

 

I tend to actually lean the opposite way. Most teams don't rely on FA to complete the better part of their core roster. Honestly most teams can't afford too. It might have been that way in the past, but I think the overall mold of the way to run a franchise has shifted to drafting and developing homegrown players. And keeping them signed to deals that benefit both player and organization.

 

If I had to venture a guess, I would say outside of the Yankees most teams cores can be traced back the their farm system in one way or another.

 

The Yankees in the mid to late 90's could say this, but not anymore.

 

Don't hurt yourself trying to connect the dots though, we would miss you too much.

 

 

 

Although I didn't mention Dice-K in my previous post. I guess you can take him off the team as well even though the didn't sign him from another MLB organization. But the Sox would still have good core regardless.