John Lackey hot stove discussion

[jacksonianmarch]

Undoubtedly, the sox will at least be kicking the tires on Lackey, so seeing as I made a topic about Bay's and Holliday's contractual projections, maybe I should do the same with Lackey.

 

Will be 31 for the entirety of 2010

102-71 W/L record

Ace of the Angels

3.81 career ERA

1.30 career WHIP

2009 line- 11-8 3.83ERA 1.27WHIP

 

Lets try and look for some comparisons out there.

 

The most logical and most recent one would be AJ Burnett. Burnett came off a more impressive season strikeout wise and wins wise, but Lackey's WHIP was a bit lower and Lackey has the extensive playoff resume. In terms of durability, Lackey had 5 straight seasons of 198IP plus. Now, he is coming off two yrs where injury has hindered the beginning of his season. One was an arm issue and another was a lower body issue. Regardless, none of them are lingering right now. And, when considering Burnett, one must always think about Burnett's injury history prior to signing this contract. Lackey, on the whole, doesnt have that problem. AND, Lackey will be a yr younger when he signs a deal.

 

Another guy to compare him to would be Kevin Millwood (5yrs 65 mil contract).

 

Now there is a reason why comparisons seem to be lacking. A lot of pitchers get locked up early, so the big time FA pitchers at a young age dont seem to be happening at all. And therefore, a lot of pitchers who hit the market end up being past their second contracts, IE, mid to late 30s. I wont consider Lackey in the same ilk as Sabathia or Santana, that's just disingenuous. But, Lackey compares rather favorably to Burnett, and due to age, lack of significant durability issues and proven top of the rotation status, I think Lackey will get a lot more. Also, consider that the other viable options aside from Lackey are lacking and a LOT of teams need pitching. So, in terms of the FA market, Lackey is gonna get a shitload of money.

 

So, lets consider AJs 5yr 82 mil deal. That is 16.4mil a yr. Well, Lackey is a yr younger, so make that a 6 yr deal. Then consider that in a fair market, Lackey gets an AAV of 17 mil. That comes out to 6yrs 102 mil. That is a fair price for a durable, proven pitcher in his prime. But now consider that Boston, NYM, maybe NYY, CHC, LA, and other big market clubs will be looking for pitching, then his price could go higher. There wont be discounts here ladies and gents. This is gonna be a big time signing for big time money

[BSN07]

Pass

[example1]

I would kick the tires on that. I think Derek Lowe would be a useful comp, though Lackey is better.

 

If they got Lackey there would be less pressure re: Josh Beckett after next year as I'm sure they'll try to acquire Felix (or maybe Roy Halladay) if possible.

 

If that is possible (by using Buchholz, of course) then the 2010 rotation would be (for the sake of discussion):

 

Felix

Lester

Beckett

Lackey

Dice-K

 

2011:

 

Felix

Lester

Lackey

Dice-K

+?

 

Seems very reasonable to me. Holliday and Lackey sign as FAs, team acquires someone else with some prospects (Roy Halliday being a backup option with the new GM in Toronto).

[Emmz]

I like this, I'd definitely give a run at Lackey, as well as go after Felix. I like the possibility of this too, I think it's certainly doable. Btw, I like that projected rotation, a lot, example.

[Gom]

I can't see Lackey leaving LA.

[BSN07]

I can't see Lackey leaving LA.

 

The trade for Kazmir almost guarantee's he leaves. Don't be surprised to see the Orioles and Nationals among other teams get in on him.

[jacksonianmarch]

The question would be, how much are the sox willing to spend.

 

Right now if you compare the salaries from April 3, 2009 to the projected team set on April 3,2010, then:

 

They save 7mil with Bay's contract ending

They add 7.7 mil with VMart being there the whole yr

They save 2 mil on Vtek assuming he re-ups with his player option

They save 5 mil with Smoltz gone

They save 5 mil with Penny gone

They save 2 mil without Saito

 

That's a net savings of 13.3mil without considering the pay increases for Ellsbury, Papelbon, Okajima, and Ramirez.

 

So, lets say Ellsbury gets a 1.5 mil raise, Papelbon gets a 2.5 mil raise, Okajima will probably see a 1 mil raise and Ramirez will probably see something similar as well.

 

That puts the savings at 7.3 mil

 

Then consider the LF position:

 

Bay or Holliday cost, lets say for arguments sake 16 mil per yr AAV

Lackey costs 17 mil per yr AAV

Felix gets traded for and signs a new contract in the 15 mil a yr AAV (seeing as the sox would have the leverage of buying out his last 2 arb yrs).

 

Thats a salary increase of $40.7 mil. That's a lot of dough to increase your spending on prior to the season starting. And when you consider the current payroll of $122mil, thats a 33% increase in operating cost for one season. I highly doubt they go this way.

[example1]

The question would be, how much are the sox willing to spend.

 

Right now if you compare the salaries from April 3, 2009 to the projected team set on April 3,2010, then:

 

They save 7mil with Bay's contract ending

They add 7.7 mil with VMart being there the whole yr

They save 2 mil on Vtek assuming he re-ups with his player option

They save 5 mil with Smoltz gone

They save 5 mil with Penny gone

They save 2 mil without Saito

 

That's a net savings of 13.3mil without considering the pay increases for Ellsbury, Papelbon, Okajima, and Ramirez.

 

So, lets say Ellsbury gets a 1.5 mil raise, Papelbon gets a 2.5 mil raise, Okajima will probably see a 1 mil raise and Ramirez will probably see something similar as well.

 

That puts the savings at 7.3 mil

 

Then consider the LF position:

 

Bay or Holliday cost, lets say for arguments sake 16 mil per yr AAV

Lackey costs 17 mil per yr AAV

Felix gets traded for and signs a new contract in the 15 mil a yr AAV (seeing as the sox would have the leverage of buying out his last 2 arb yrs).

 

Thats a salary increase of $40.7 mil. That's a lot of dough to increase your spending on prior to the season starting. And when you consider the current payroll of $122mil, thats a 33% increase in operating cost for one season. I highly doubt they go this way.

 

1. They lose Ortiz, Lowell, Beckett and V-Mart the following year.

2. They were willing to spend 20+m on Teixeira last year.

3. They are saving money on the talents of Youkilis, Pedroia and Lester already

 

I think it would be a big increase in spending for one season, with a big drop off after that.

 

For a point of reference, for the 2011 season, the Red Sox have less money committed than either St. Louis, Toronto or Seattle. (43.483m)

 

http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=p4ew-fwu2XT3cpPRtt9qIGw

 

That chart shows the Sox committed to 76m for next year. It could be wrong, I haven't checked it against Cot's team-by-team breakdown. However, if true that means that they're down about 40m in salary just from teams like the 2009 Cubs and Mets.

[jacksonianmarch]

that doesnt include the options and the arbitration increases

[example1]

that doesnt include the options and the arbitration increases

 

The answer, found here, http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=tz8qHiYrIzlFtVnly7gibjw&output=html, puts them at 108m for next year, and then then 49m. That includes the options, not the arb increases.

 

 

They would need to be a higher end $$ club next year, but would be very reasonable after that IMO.

[TheKilo]

As I said in the other thread, I'm all for the Sox adding Lackey and signing Bay/Holliday and calling it an offseason.

[Dojji]

As I said in the other thread' date=' I'm all for the Sox adding Lackey and signing Bay/Holliday and calling it an offseason.[/quote']

 

Shortstop.

[TheKilo]

Shortstop.

 

Fully comfortable with a Gonzalez/Lowrie platoon.

[Dipre]

Fully comfortable with a Gonzalez/Lowrie platoon.

 

Agreed.

 

The Brewers are going to try to package Hardy with Gamel to fill both of their SP holes simultaneously. Not worth it.

[Dojji]

Considering just how weak we are at 3B on the farm I'd take a look, but I think the Brewers are being foolish here. Bunding Gamel with Hardy is a really bad move because if reflects a lack of faith in both Gamel and Hardy. You probably get more overall value if you package them separately.

 

Also, considering how rare top prospects are traded for top prospects packaging two or more young cost-controlled players together in the same deal suggests they're going after a veteran rather than after youth. Which is interesting.

[Dipre]

Considering just how weak we are at 3B on the farm I'd take a look, but I think the Brewers are being foolish here. Bunding Gamel with Hardy is a really bad move because if reflects a lack of faith in both Gamel and Hardy. You probably get more overall value if you package them separately.

 

Also, considering how rare top prospects are traded for top prospects packaging two or more young cost-controlled players together in the same deal suggests they're going after a veteran, not prospects per se. Which is interesting.

 

Gamel is a pretty awful third baseman.

[Dojji]

Gamel is a pretty awful third baseman.

 

I assume you mean defensively. His offensive numbers are fine.

 

There's a pretty obvious solution to the problem of a bad defensive third baseman. Two actually, really. There's the Mark Teixeira route and the Ryan Braun route. As long as he can hit, I wouldn't mind bringing him on in if the price was still reasonable.

[Dipre]

I assume you mean defensively. His offensive numbers are fine.

 

There's a pretty obvious solution to the problem of a bad defensive third baseman. Two actually, really. There's the Mark Teixeira route and the Ryan Braun route.

 

You assume correctly.

 

The problem is the "routes" you mention carry with them a failure rate.

 

Are you serious with this?

 

No really.

 

Are you serious?

[Dojji]

The problem is the "routes" you mention carry with them a failure rate.

 

Sure, but that's true for prospects in general.

 

Yes, I see the 53-error season in the minors just like you do. The amazing thing is that his range seems to be fine, he just has the worst hands and head in minor league baseball at third base. I wouldn't have thought it was possible to be that bad and still be a starting position player. So we might be looking at a special case here.

 

Worse comes to worst the guy's still hitting well enough to have a possible future as a DH. That being the case, I could see why an NL team like the Brewers would want to move him.

[Dipre]

Sure, but that's true for prospects in general.

 

Yes, I see the 53-error season in the minors just like you do. The amazing thing is that his range seems to be fine, he just has the worst hands and head in minor league baseball at third base. I wouldn't have thought it was possible to be that bad and still be a starting position player. So we might be looking at a special case here.

 

Worse comes to worst the guy's still hitting well enough to have a possible future as a DH. That being the case, I could see why an NL team like the Brewers would want to move him.

 

But i don't see why the Red Sox would want to acquire him.

[Dojji]

Certainly adds an element of risk to an already risky Hardy acquisition doesn't it? Hardy's an interesting option but he's certainly not worth overpaying for.

 

I'd say just because the Brewers are "looking" to bundle the two, doesn't mean they'll throw a tantrum or turn down a favorable deal for Hardy alone.

[WhiskeyBreath]

I wouldn't mind having Lackey in Boston for AJ Burnett money.

[BSN07]

I wouldn't mind having Lackey in Boston for AJ Burnett money.

 

What? Are you drunk?

 

 

 

I guess I'm just not that high on Lackey. He seems to be a power pitcher, who's power is fading IMO. But thats just from the eyeball test and some of the games I have happened to see him pitch in(outside of game 1 lol)

[Keeper]

If he's drunk for wanting Lackey, so am I.

[msubulldogs21]

I can't see Lackey leaving LA.

 

Agree on this. Angels have quite a bit of money. I think he stays.

[Dojji]

What? Are you drunk?

 

 

 

I guess I'm just not that high on Lackey. He seems to be a power pitcher, who's power is fading IMO. But thats just from the eyeball test and some of the games I have happened to see him pitch in(outside of game 1 lol)

 

Actually Lackey's been very consistent over his career. He can be counted on for a decent ERA, a bb/9 of south of 3, a k/9 of right around 7, I don't see much evidence of decline in his statline numbers.

 

I'm more worried about his health. Lackey's missed some time over the last couple years and that might be a precursor to more serious injuries. If it wasn't for that concern I'd be all for getting him. A healthy rotation of Beckett, Lester, Lackey, Daisuke and Buchholz could be incredible.

[BSN07]

Listen I know Lackey is a good SP. I guess I'm just used to the Sox tuning him up. And I don't like his injury history. Same reason I was iffy on giving AJ "AJ type" money.

 

I guess I could get on board, but I hope they try a few other things first. Lackey's probably the best SP available, so it's not like he will sign too quick.

[BoSox21]

having a top four like Lester-Beckett-Buchholz-Matsuzaka leads me to believe there's no chance this team shells out the coin necessary to get Lackey

[TheKilo]

having a top four like Lester-Beckett-Buchholz-Matsuzaka leads me to believe there's no chance this team shells out the coin necessary to get Lackey

 

Which will be disappointing. Like last offseason, it would be a real shame for the Sox to sit idle and not use any of their financial capabilities.

 

Signing Lackey to bolster their rotation would be a bold, bold move, one that could pay huge dividends.

[jacksonianmarch]

If the sox expect a front 5 of Beckett-Lester-DiceK-Buchholz-Wake to start the season and be there full time, I will absolutely LOVE it. The sox need one more quality SP with Buchholz' streakiness and with Wake and DiceK's injury history